Should I be surprised to read from Dobbin that the NDP should not challenge the Libs on real electoral reforms? Does he not need a "new approach" too?

Been there, done that and gotten the T-shirt.

This has simply been done too many times. In addition, it seemed a while back the Tyee was trying not to show its obvious bias; I guess the people who bankroll this site have put a stop to that.

If Layton would loudly condemn the NMU, SPP, and the "free" trade agreements, and shed some light on the reality of elite rule... then he'd look like an alternative to me. I find the NDP very weak as opposition.

Future Federal election:

Federal Liberal brochure:
VOTE FOR DION because_____________

Canadian Voter:
VOTE FOR DION because_____________

Both the aforementioned will happen concurrently, with each gridlocked side desperately hoping the other side will "blink first" so the other side can THEN fill in THEIR blank.

In this article, Harper is accused to "neo-liberalism". Elsewhere in the Tyee he is accused of "neo-conservatism". Amazing how one man can be all things to all people!

Neo liberalism and neo conservativism are basically the same gloabalized, free market corporate dictatorship theories, so it makes no difference which nomiker is used.

Ed Deak.

The quote feature isn't working so I'll just have to paraphrase Murray. He claims a Liberal minority would be best for NDP-inclined voters and that we should do all we can to elect that Liberal minority.

However, he also says its a complex question due to various reasons he summarizes.

So here's where the rubber hits the road. We just had a Liberal minority which the NDP supported. The Liberals refused to allow NDPers into cabinet or to work on a common budget together. The NDP certainly offered to keep the Libs in power so they could pass their promised-but-not-implemented legislation but instead Paul Martin decided he would be better off facing the electorate than rewriting parts of his budget to suit the NDP.

Everyone has wanted to focus on the NDP withdrawing their support for the Libs (that support wasn't buying anything in return). What they should be focusing on is why Paul Martin decided he'd rather face a general election than the NDP.

My view is that Paul Martin did not see himself as being "allied" with the NDP nor did he see much of his support coming from that direction. Across the country, but especially in Ontario, the voters Martin was wooing were those on the so-called "centre-Right". Therefore being seen to be working with the NDP would actually work against Martin's re-election hopes. The centre of political gravity was on the opposite side of the political spectrum because all those Ontario swing voters were not in between the Libs and NDP, they were between the Cons and Libs.

So there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the next election could result in a repeat of what occurred almost 40 years ago. That's very wishful thinking, instead it would be a repeat of the government we had just a short time ago. Even if the NDP did supposedly hold the balance of power with a Liberal minority, the Libs would be more inclined to work with the Cons (or at least steal their ideas as Martin did with the Cdn Alliance) and not with the NDP.

Don't look to 40 years ago to see what a Lib minority would act like, look at 2 years ago.

Guys!
The NDP is not THE opposition.

It just seems that way.

They are a minor 4th party in the House - punching, as has so frequently been the case in the history of this country, way above their weight.

Compare numbers in the house, research budget and staff, funding and every other parameter you can think of and the NDP are nothing but minor also-runs.

The fact so many people get so worked up over what they can and cannot do has to be wonderful news for the party.

Who knew so many people cared?

Percy: neoconservative and neoliberal have always been the same thing, In America the preferred term is neocon, in the rest of the world it's neoliberal. You can look it up.

You should know this stuff!

Layton is a moron, the best friend anti-socialists have had in years.

Common sense & lowering taxes is resonating with voters so the BC Liberals are safe as are Harper's conservatives in Ottawa. Dion is a one trick environment pony "I wasted $6 billion doing nothing for the environment but I named my dog Kyoto"

Life is good for Canada maintaining a steady course of good government.

Where's the editorial advocating a vote for the Conservatives? I can't find it.

Logjam 603
Depressing to see there is still no sign of intelligent life in Alberta.

Technetium
Life's not fair.

Suck it up.

"Where's the editorial advocating a vote for the Conservatives? I can't find it."

You must have gotten lost. This isn't Canwest.

Turn to the right and click here:

canada.com

Percy, the quote was - "The key to ridding the country not only of Stephen Harper but of radical neo-liberalism is to give the NDP the balance of the power."

I think, reinforcing his main poiint.

So Stephen Harper is Time Magazine Canada's News maker of the Year ( formerly called Man of the Year ) in Canada.
His mug will be all over the news stands and on supermarket shelves everywhere.
And to Booker's comments on Canada.com. Have you looked at this site? Look at it again. Go to their most commented section that features these tidbits
1. Harper's challenge of same-sex marriage in the upcoming election. Am I the only one angered?
2. Alberta Separation
3. Do the Conservatives have a 'hidden agenda"?
Now does this sound like some kind of right wing website?
You can get right wing viewpoints at The Tyee too. You are reading one right now.

Ronny boy,

Your point on Harpo being Time magazine's newsmaker of the year is?

As for Canada.com's most commented section, it's been those three subjects for a very long time. Also, Canada.com has for years, opened up "controversial" topics for their readers to comment on - how you can turn that into meaning it is not a right wing site follows a baffling string of logic. The comments also are very slanted to views that are very much like yours. My feeling is that canwest invites comments on right-wing hot topics is because they know that the majority of the people who comment on Canada.com conform to their line of thinking. Canada.com notoriously (at least they used to, I stopped trying to post comments over a year ago) omits "left-wing" views.

Technetium:

Good point:

However, why arouse a sleeping giant...more fun to let the minority speak out.

ALSO Hmm " intelligent life " is inversely proportional to a booming economy ?

Geez and I thought all these years it was the other way around... ie directly proportional.

Those Arts profs sure put on a good show.

Damn .

"You must have gotten lost."

Maybe, or perhaps it is The Tyee that got lost. I enjoyed it quite a bit when it was first created but hadn't visited in quite a while. Doesn't seem quite as balanced as it used to be =)

"Life's not fair."

If The Tyee is your life...dude, you gotta get out!

commentor: Percy
posted: 5 Hours Ago
In this article, Harper is accused to "neo-liberalism". Elsewhere in the Tyee he is accused of "neo-conservatism". Amazing how one man can be all things to all people!

Do you really need a lesson on the nature of individuality?

Hear hear, Mr Dobbin (and Chantal Hebert if she's tuning in). The NDP has turned in a piss poor performance doing the Liberals job for them this year.

Technetium
That reference to 'life' is a figure of speech.

Not the kind of thing tech dudes know much about apparently.

What's wrong Ronnie, did you forget it's only TIME 'Canada' the Man of the year is chosen in NEW YORK? Harper did make lots of news - most of it bad.

If he gets a majority there's gonna be a lot more bad news.

Didn't see any predictions from you on the other site Ronnie, why not?

I have to agree. I certainly fondly remember the days of Stephen Lewis and Ed Broadbent. It was downhill from there. Too bad the NDP cannot adjust policy to get bigger seat totals.

About Time's man of the year? Garbage. He's the only Canadian they know and he won't hold power much longer.

With all the people who might vote NDP to keep the Liberals honest, it may be neccessary for some to vote Conservative to keep the NDP honest. The rest could vote Green to keep the NDP honest.

It's too bad none of them were honest to begin with, then you wouldn't have to vote against them to encourage honesty.

jwstewart
The only ones who have proved themselves dishonest beyond any doubt are the Liberals and the Conservatives - the one's who've actually had a chance to prove what they've said were lies and that they had no intention of keeping their promises. What would happen if a minor party came to power?

We'll have to wait and see.

Why would the Greens settle for one seat??

The NDP has three problems in the next election: Jack Layton, no policy which anyone can articulate or differentiate from the Grits, the Greens.

Dumping Jack is not an option in time for this election. So, policy? The problem there is that with the Liberals running from the left, there is precious little which the NDP can say which will not sound like it came from the Liberal playbook. There is no clear focus for the NDP, no clear message - "elect us to keep the Liberal honest" isn't policy, it's tactics.

The one area the NDP had an edge was as the enviro-guys. Ms. May has pretty much put paid to that and, while Jack will murble on about wind and Kyoto, Dion and May are going to suck the oxygen right out of that position. Worse, the NDP has to keep the CAW happy and that means - somehow - pretending it is a good thing to be building SUVs in Oshawa. Good luck with that.

The best outcome for the NDP's future is a small CPC majority - say three or four seats - which would give the NDP time to a) dump Jack, b) come up with a platform that does not sound like reheated Naomi Klein, c) cut a deal with the Greens for a shared slate.

Another minority - CPC or Lib - will leave Jack in place and the party having to make pragmatic rather than principled decisions as to supporting the government. They will continue to look tired, irrelevant and corrupted.

Gawd there must be a federal election looming on the not too distant horizon....

I like the assumption that the NDP have to deal with the Greens - yah, just like they did in the byelection in London.

The NDP policy will remain "ignore them" except for BC where it will "don't split the vote".

Environmental issues cannot be fully and truly addressed until the parties that created those issues in the first place be replaced.

Things must be getting serious if Jay Currie and rockerbiff are back.

Running for the Greens next time around rockerbiff?

Jay, the difference between the NDP and Liberals is that one is sincere about their platform and the other isn't. If one reads just the platform then the Greens under May look pretty much the same as Harper's "Clean Air" policies. The difference is whether you believe the words or the history.

Questions for Murray Dobbin.
Where do I check "Minority Government" on my ballot?
Do you think a Liberal Majority would be worse than another Conservative Minority?

When push comes to shove, I wish the NDP would actually step up to the plate and do what people who voted for a social conscience is gov't elected them to do.

YES, a Conservative govt of ANY kind risks disaster! AND there is a good chance it could be a MAJORITY if...

The NDP/LIBERALS/GREEN to do get there act together and CALL for strategic voting! I fone of these parties won last time they get to keep that seat. the real seats up for grabs are the CONSERVATIVE ones and whoever finished second (other than the BLOC... and even the Bloc will be worth considering for Quebec voters!))should get startegic votes!

One thing is for sure: Harper is moving forward with his agenda and letting the other parties duke it out amongst themselves. The libs and NDP need to stop trying to divine their fortunes from the polls and instead set forth a well researched and realistic set of policies that will move the country forward. Harper is a pragmatic man, and knows how to manage his cards, and has down so in a proactive manner (whether you agree with his decisions or not). The other parties will suffer because they are reactive and are not articulating a clear vision for the country.

Is Dion a man of the people? 3 corporate events in one day planned to get those donations in before the law cuts off the tap on Jan 1st.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061218.RDION18/TPStory/Business

Hmm.

NDP and Greens possibly merge.

Chicken Little meets Big Turkey ( or is it vice versa )?

Pass the drumstick ....after the drum roll.

Strategic voting makes no sense unless you can get the Liberals can commit to a real coalition with Cabinet seats and specific policy concessions for coalition partners.

Dream on if you think the Liberals will enter a formal coalition with the NDP and the Greens.

Both Layton and May should craft a proposal and take it to the Dion Liberals.

In such a case my money is on the Liberal refusal to sign on the dotted line. Anyone who thinks these guys have changed hasn't been paying attention.

Just cast your mind back a few weeks to the sight of Bill Graham braying about the Conmen killing Income Trusts; do that and maybe you'll realize who pulls the Liberals' string and what there real priorities are.

Liberals and principles are a contradiction in terms.

Charles. right on the money! I couldn't agree more. I believe this is what most progressive social democrats would like to acheive.

"What would happen if a minor party came to power?"

Good question. Maybe we should ask Bob Rae ;)

I cannot believe the supporters of Harper. They not only want to shoot themselves in the foot one more time, but the whole country as well. I cannot think of anything more depressing than to have Canada a copy of Bush's US, and a pale one at that!

Ya, because the Liberals and Conservatives have such a stellar record across the provinces. The Left has never won a majority anywhere in the maritimes but I don't see too many Libs and Cons talking about the wealth and opportunity they've brought to the region.

Not to mention I don't hear anyone on the Right ever talking up Mike Harris and his billions in hidden deficits.

Or McGuinty and the way he's managed to do the square root of bugger all about the mess Harris left in place....Except vote himself and his members a big raise.

Apparently they were afraid of looking cheap.

I have already decided NOT to vote in the next election, for the first time in my adult life. No more lesser of evils. That's it. Patoooie! :-) So I had also to here decided to stay out of this thread and let you thumbsuckers, who absolutely have to have your electoral security blankets to hold onto, to fight it out amongst yourselves.

So my original intent was only to read here, of course. You can blame Fait Lux for having provoked me to enter the fray, at least this much.

Fait and I, at least, agree this much. :-)

There is a major crisis in the process of development within this society, in my view, and part of it involves the lack of real choices available to "the people" within the so-called democratic, or especially "electoral" aspect of it. And, in my further view, so long as we go along with it, as if this is really all there is, we continue and prolong the bullshitt agony of it all.

It's time to break the sham of it by our non-participation, as do some 40% of Canadians already, and thereby withdraw our vote of confidence in it. The sham of this democracy has gone on long enough. Our participation only further enables its dysfunctionality.

We are headed for a crisis showdown in this neoconservative society anyway.

"Bring it on", says I.

That's it. I've shot my wad. I'm gonna shower and shave, and shed the bullshit of this so-called "democratic system". I'll let you thumbsuckers and Linus blanket huggers have at it here, at least for the rest of the evening. :-)

And in case I haven't been clear, these smiley-face social democrats in the NDP are as much a part of the problem as are the liberals and progressive conservatives within the Liberal Party. Cut from the same co-opted cloth.

---------------------------------------

Frank,

Get the Firefox 2.0 Browser online, and then download the Extra Toolbar Buttons extension programme. Gives you full editing control over your Tyee comment form, regardless of the failures within that software.

Also works to edit within your own blog.

If you need the links, let me know, and I'll find 'em for you, and post 'em here.

I intend to vote "Stratigically". I simply want Harper out NOW! If that means Dion gets a majority I can live with that.

The background real power of business will continue to run this country and most others until it runs the whole thing into the dirt.

What offends me about Harper is that he makes it obvious that he thinks that's a good idea.

So I'm only one vote but I am paying attention this time. If someone can convince me that Dion has it and needs to be reined in by some of us voting NDP or Green I'll be listening.

Murray...i don't think many of us are missing "an important piece of the puzzle: the nature of polical power" as you state in the begining of your article. i would say as a woman in this society i understand the nature of
political power. your comment is patronizing.

your article was just a rehashing of the ol' vote for the NDP 'cause they're:
the only alternative
they need your vote
not perfect but who are you going to vote for?
etc. etc. etc.

as for your assertion that the Greens took seven seats from the NDP perhaps a litle reality check is in order. they have not been able to deal with the Greens- in the 2004 election they were endorsed by several environmental groups as having a better environmental policy than the Greens. they were unable to use that effectively. the Greens did not take votes from the NDP, the NDP lost those votes. also not every Green vote is a NDP vote, some green voters are fiscal conservatives and are voting Green due to the environment, in the past they have voted for the old P C's.

you are right when you state that "it is in Jack Layton's hands", that's the scary part. where is the vision?
In every election the politicians thunder that this "is the most important election ever"...it's all part of the political rhetoric. But in the upcoming election it is true. Our country needs leadership on the environment, leadership on our beleagured social programs ie: the attack on women's programs by the Harper Gov't, leadership to get out of Afghanistan, leadership on the economy. it sure looks like Canadians want a new vision and are really looking at what the political parties have to offer.
The environment is the make it or break it in this election. The NDP has missed the boat.

Now how on earth is an individual voter supposed to vote for a Liberal minority? You can hope for it, but I don't see how anyone can ensure that particular outcome. If you recommend voting for NDP to ensure a Liberal minority, and enough people follow, that will only result in a Conservative majority, won't it?

Coyote:
I was waiting for the polls to open one election because My helper needed to vote, I thought, I had no idea who I supported or not. We sat drinking coffee and finally I said: "So who are you gonna vote for?" He said: "I am not voting for any of them." I Got out the "I Ching" and threw the coins. The Hexagram was "Po"
"The wise man takes no action!"
so we went to work

And sometimes-, sometimes that is indeed true, brother. :-)

Take care, whatever ya do.

- doesn't make a lot of difference who you vote for, the way the whole system is set up - a good essay on Canada, a managed democracy at http://www.rudemacedon.ca/lgi/can-managed-dem.html

Gotta love this - Dobbin writes there is such desire to turf the Tories - and compares it to the desire to turf Mulroney.

Not even close. Harper may have a difficult time winning his majority, however he is unlikely to lose next election.

This article is absolutely hilarious, yet angering. All Dobbin can write about are social consciousness and environmental sustainability. Beyond that, the Liberal platform is pretty thin. Furthermore, these two issues really only resonate with people who would never vote for him in the first place.

SSM is aside, Afghanistan is looking a little better - income trusts are out of sight out of mind. The only people that really angered was his core (myself included), who felt betrayed, but couldn't place their vote anywhere else.

This is a government that will be able to look at the voters come election day and say, we promised you five things - and we following through on every one of them - i.e. tax cuts, GST, accountability act, crime, health care and child care.

They delivered on every promise. We have a huge war chest for this and future elections.....

I am not all that worried.

Every core promise that is - I wouldn't consider the Trust promise a core promise.

Frank:

Maritimers and the opposite of many Canadians. Maritimers don't like to think of themselves as left wing socialists - yet they truly are. They like their handouts more than anybody. Have you been out there? They have more roads, highways and bridges than any other part of the country.

This is why they have had such a terrible economy. They haven't been able to diversify much beyond fishing and energy.

Harper got in trouble for blasting their sense of entitlement.

Just a word of caution (and encouragement I hope):

A "functional government" is better than no government at all.

If you think the thugs you are dealing with now are bad do not let the bastards
blow the whole thing out of the water!
It can be a "hell" of a lot worse

When the thing breaks down it REALLY breaks down.

I been there and have the T-shirt:
MSF Liberia
1993

Now this may not seem to apply to whether we vote Liberal, Neocon or Neocom

Every time I drive into Nanaimo the communications tower in South Wellington catches my eye: it still works.

Every time I returned to camp in Liberia I saw a very similar tower.
It was shot to peices but still standing.

it did not work

There will be a very substantial Anyone But Harper vote in the next election and it will swamp Mr. Dobbin's concerns for balanced political power in Ottawa. A lot of voters will shift from the NDP, arguing that they cannot afford to waste a vote that might remove the right. In some ridings this might work for the NDP but overall it will help the Liberals. A defeat now for the Conservatives would remove Harper from the scene and probably move the the party to the center, at which point left voters might safely move back home. But for the next time, watch out, Layton, it looks bad.

And you sure don't know anything about those subjects, do you cappy? At least Dobbin CAN write.

Harper probably will win the election. There are many Canadians who don't know what's good for them.

It will be a disaster and may well mean the end of the country. And when it happens, cappy, I'm holding you and your kind responsible because you should have known better.

That selfish people like you who show their ignorance every time they post something on one of these threads should ruin this country and turn it into one big slot machine from one end to the other is a real tragedy. You and Ron Erwin must be brothers.

Today you've demonstrated how little you know about Atlantic Canada.

What will it be tomorrow?

Question: Which MP and and their partner who is also an MP - installed grid-tied solar photovoltaics in the house they live in Toronto Danforth, installed solar hot water panels as well (awhile ago), was politically instrumental in setting up the succesful Windshare wind turbine cooperative at the foot of the Gardiner expressway in Toronto - right by the Canadian National Exhibition (that supplies power to 200 Toronto homes).

Yes, and what other guy has a dog named Kyoto.

Here your choices: (1) Jack Layton / Olivia Chow, (2) Stephan Dion (3) everbody else

Enough with the hot air. Lets call a spade a shovel shall we.

This article, under the pretense of journalism, is so predictable that it adds up to little more than the bilious off-gassing of an NDP lifer. Hence it belongs on an N-dipper list-serve and not here.

What's to say??! There's almost nothing useful here to comment on ... Jack is a political animal, he will say and do almost anything to curry votes, and he, and ndp piffle-meisters like m dobbin, are seriously out of touch with voters.

Only problem bc4me, is that everything you've just said - applied to Dion and Harper, applies too - but times at least 4.

And, we know what the old line parties will do because they've done it forever.

It's time for a new broom - someone who puts their money where their mouth is, as Chris Bouris points out in a constructive post above your scurrilous diatribe.

You are toast lefties. Harper will defeat you. This guy scares his opponents, he is unpredictable. He is smart. He has figured out Canadian politics. He marches to his own drummer.
Now, I don't discount Stephane Dion. He is another nerd like Harper with just as much staying power. But the Conservatives stand alone with their message. And the Greens, Liberals and NDP have to fight over the spoils.
I'd rather be in my position than yours, but I don't underestimate Dion. He is a very smart man.

Unlike you Ron.

Which is why he's dangerous. Thank God I'm not in your position - I don't like riding in the back.

Harper certainly does have a strange bunch of friends.

Chris; I am not sure what you mean about " your choices" but I expect it is a selective statement aimed at leftist voters.
Yes, that's all they have to hope for, so sad. I mean the party is over. The left (lib) has lost any credibility they might have been able to B.S. the Canadian electorate into believing.
What good arguments do you lefties have left?
That there are more MRI's in Pittsburgh than is Canadar is a good thing? That we don't need this medical shit. We have a more compassionate way of dealing with things?
Well welcome to the 21st century. Tommy Douglas was a socialist. No doubt. And he will forever wave your flag, (liberals) so I say to the visitors at The Tyee, look for a Conservative majority, whenever we have the next election. Sooner or later.

- mon dieu, we aren't playing dungeons and dragons, and the idea isn't to defeat 70% of our population by a destructive robot. Why this scenario is comforting to you, IAMC, only you can fathom.
Maybe because I've seen really hopeless gov'ts that looking at what we have to work with makes it seem a wee hopeful. If the way our gov't is structured is unsatisfactory - make it an election issue, and see which party brings the best solutions to the table.

The fact that the tide has turned against the neo-cons in the US - having a conservative gov't in Canada looks even less appealing to those who could swallow the concept. I am scrapping all the "strategic" voting crap the next go around, and voting for the person who best represents my constituency and ideals. Novel idea, for sure, but it brings with it no great expectations or heart break.

Who is the mysterious 'we' you're always referring to Ron?

And what's your compassionate way of dealing with folks who need help?

I haven't noticed you stopping and giving the guy at the corner of Cook and Pandora any money - you phony.

He's there around 8am every morning.

And what is this piece of complete illiteracy:

You really should be arrested by the Grammar & Spelling Police.

You should really consider taking a break from posting here. No one would want to vote for a party that you support.

Guilt by association! Or have you just been drinking while you watched Monday night football?

IAMC - Choices (to me) means who has walked the talk - as in who does what is claimed. Verifiable. Evidence. No "rightee" nor "leftie"; no veils of rhetoric of which there are volumes on these comment posts. You can freely choose other beliefs. No one is telling you what to "believe".

You appear to want to brand me too as a "leftie" too to give you some comfort reference. That angle is not going to work who ever you are. You hide behind aliases and appear to but to regularly deride other posters in commentary.

My comment is legitimate and stands on substance not retoric. I state my point.
There is choice number (4..or more), btw - One choice (at least) is: "I don't like any of your suggested choices".
And that's why (in my opinion) we have evidence, and peer reviews of same.

Living in a vacuum is an option, pleasant for some - but shooting one's mouth in public is another reality.

Harper, Dion, Layton or Duceppe? It's a crap shoot.

I mean, Afghan president Karzai's popularity has sunk from the mid-80s to 68% in a recent poll of 1,300 Afghans - but that still makes him more popular among Afghans than Harper and Dion, combined, are among Canadians. And by that same measure, Layton's marginally more popular than the Taliban...

I must confess, everyone, it took me a bit of time and scrolling before I actually found a comment that made good sense. (I think you were the first, Fiat Lux, but even you couldn't keep it focused on Dobbins piece so... it took a while). All history aside, folks, its the present. This isn't Paul Martin running and its a different cast of players persay in the Lib party. Harpers Cons are already looking pretty old. Layton's growing a beard. There's a teacher, a food bank runner and a hippie chick on the scene now, if you all catch my drift. People vote much the same way as they did last time... but last time there were a lot of cob webs on the Liberal machine. Change was inevidable and its been a good thing for the Libs. Some (but not all) of those cobwebs have been swept up. And the Cons? Their rides' been dinged and sratched enough to see the eyesore coming from a distance now, never mind the up close and personal which, straight out of the showroom, was never really a pretty sight to begin with.

Murray Dobbin... your name is BIG with me today! High marks, I'll give it an A and there really isn't much need for me to comment on it any more than you already have. Its a job well done, I agree almost fully with your assessment (there are always a couple of things, but I won't quibble) and in how the voters out there should think. I don't believe Dion should be given a majority "just because" either, that Harper would be disasterous if he holds power in any way shape or form so what does that common sensically leave? (people don't realize the long term effects of his cuts to spending and GST) You've spelled it out. NDP holds the balance of power. I know you're an NDP'er with conviction and that's ok! And strategy is what it is. But for what its worth, I like your strategy and your soft sell. Its how it should be done. I am once again, impressed! ;-)

Coyote, Avicenna, a pleasure to read your words as always. :-)

And yet it took so little time to scroll through your post before finding a comment that was completely obnoxious.

Alas, Clearcut, I'll take my lumps where they are due. (mind you, if you're not into obnoxious posts, don't bother reading the first bunch, you'll find plenty of obnoxious posts there, too!) :-)

Careful Brain...

What's worse than being onbnoxious is actually " MELLOWING out " ...

Have a good one !

It is kind of a moot point. You see, the NDP has never been even close to forming a federal government. They defeat themselves every time but just can't realise why or how.

The latest polls also do not look very good for Herr Harper, either.

Not at the moment they don't. The Bloc has that honour. When Smilin' Jack triggered the last election he won a few seats but lost the balance of power.

the brain et Murray Dobbin.

How do you get 'strategy' out of that?

It's not even close to being true. The NDP is the 4th (Fourth) party in the house. It doesn't 'hold' the balance of anything now and as long as the Bloc hangs on their seats after the next election - assuming there is a minority government - the Bloc will hold the balance of power after the election.

The only way that would change brain was if people would ignore your 'strategic' voting nonsense and turn massively to the NDP.

There is no such thing as 'strategic' voting without a strategic plan. And it's obvious the Liberals aren't going to approach the people who could affect one with them (the Greens and the NDP) because they really aren't interested in change and sharing power.

Nothing new about these new Liberals.
They're just as power hungry and selfish - and as ruled by Bay street as ever.

Get ready for a conservative majority.

I'm thinking of starting an 'anybody but Harper' Blog - interested?

G West:

Request clarification:

I thought you already DID since DAY 1 of the Federal LIEberal turfing " by popular demand ".

Also, remind people the straw poll deadline re: personal predictions of Federal party standings after the next election is tomorrow ,Dec. 20, isn't it.

I'm not sure who the backroom policy makers of the NDP are, but they sure remind me of the US Democrats, and almost as bad as Tony Blair's Third Way crew, doing their best to stop the Party from standing up and go after the major issues, like the NAU, the SPP, and the consequences of the collapse of the worthless US dollar that could happen any day.

Does any Party have any plans to mitigate the effects after the collapse of the presently ruling, fascist, criminal, market economic capitalism ?

If the true believers haven't heard it yet, China announced getting rid of their $3.2 trillion dollar holdings and switching to Euros and gold. Iran also announced to sell their oil for Euros and gold in the future. If the other OPEC countries follow, it is godbye US dollar.

Now, the most remarkable issue concerning our "newsmaker of the year" is that he's still dreaming of selling Canada to the USA.

In all my years in business, I've never heard of a bankrupt company buying a healthy one, unless, of course, the management are complete idiots, or crooks.

So, what say our trolls?

Ed Deak.

maestro
I said from day 1 that Harper had a cynical plan to use his minority to push special interest groups and regional differences into the conditions necessary for a majority.

I still think that's true.

It's hardly what I want and I'm more than willing to do what little I can to prevent it.

But, that being said, the conclusions I'm drawing are pragmatic observations of the reality I see unfolding.

I will be overjoyed if people - both in and out of politics - disabuse me of my pessimistic musings.

The polls close midnight (PST) on the 20th - on the Glavin/Tieleman thread, n'est-ce pas?

Can everyone please PLEASE stop using the phrase "the Liberals campaign from the left and govern from the right"!?!? Makes for a good slogan but when we look at their record, it just doesn't wash. Unless you're an idiot. With programs like the gajillion dollar gun registry, endorsing same-sex marriage, staying out of Iraq, etc., how the hell can anyone call them a right-wing party? And the upper end of our income taxes are still among the highest in the OECD. And the most scaled (progressive) in that they tax the rich far more than the poor. All Liberal policies. Real Nazis, that crew. Sure they went after the debt but that's only because we were spending 45% of all OUR tax dollars toward paying interest on the behemoth. And we have the lowest level of unemployment in history.

Ed do you even have a clue what those words mean that you casually bandy around? Fascist? In Canada? Fascism is about overwhelming state power and mass action through the guise of progress. We are experiencing a constant "hollowing" of the state in Canada and elsewhere. What exactly does "fascist capitalism" look like anyways? Don't answer that - it's a rhetorical question.

And made cuts to health transfers and other parts of the social safety net, increased homelessness, increased child poverty, campaigned on huge corporate tax cuts after going into surplus, signed NAFTA, sent combat troops to Afghanistan, increased emissions, ignored Red Book promises on the FTA and GST and that's just off the top of my head.

Real Socialist Internationale types.

LRL....I grew up as a fascist in a fascist country and a fascist family and fought in a nazi satellite army in WW2.

My first contact with democracy came in 1948, when I went to Cambridge, by courtesy of the British government. It was a rude awakening, but I immediately got hooked on democracy, studied it and have been fighting against all ruling classes and dictatorships ever since.

So I do have a faint idea what fascist means and how fascists think. Also, I am a dedicated private, as opposed to the phoney concept of, "free" enterpriser.

Neoclassical market economic capitalism is a fascist theory seeking world domination under a multinatonal corporte dictatorship, using the perceived power of imaginary capital, created by the banks for the purpose of global colonization and enslavement.

When banks in certain countries are permitted and encouraged to create capital from the air for the takeover and collectivization of the resources of others, in other countries, it is a crime
wave and governments that encourage it are fascists.

Ed Deak.

sez left-right-left

What are you talking about? DO you have a single clue about how the tax system works and where the rich get their income?

Obviously not. The Liberals have designed the tax system very nicely - in conjunction with their corporate friends and the banks - to make sure that the taxes are NOT paid by the rich.

Which is why the "campaign from the left and govern from the right" slogan is ABSOUTELY true.

What planet do you live on?

G West;

Apologies, I missed "day one"...if it was waaaaaaaay back ...

However, your first sentence is an excellent point, it coalesces the " Canadian Political Power" acquisition version of the " Colonel's secret recipe ".

If such a power attainment formula/recipe for forming the Federal Gov't has been established, and fairly entrenched , why re-invent the wheel ? Other possibilites exist, but its often path- of -least- resistance given politics is increasingly, yet unfortunately, based on short- term visions.

Harper, in my view, is morping into a " Right -of- center Liberal"...which in my view is effectively "Tory" .
The LIEberals are trying to find the Canadian patent/copyright to that LIEberal method, but grudgingly realizing this is one thing that has been in the "Public Domain" since Day One. The Lieberals, in my view have simply been " Left -of -center Tories ", but claiming something different, maybe the General Public is incresingly seeing this Pinnochio act is not simply a BC NDP phenomenon.

The Federal LIEberals , in my view, would have ultimately done much of what the Tories did..or Undid...LIEberals are notorious for (i) UNoriginality / Rip-Off (ii) Hypocrisy or(iii) BOTH .

The Federal LIEberals simply took it too far to the edge, it was predictable given their poli-graph, and they paid the consequences. In fact, I' d even take a R-E-A-L stab and say they would love to have Harper as THEIR leader,( and I can already hear the TYEE comrade posters shrieking before I even finish this line and post it !!!)

As the Political World turns...

IAMC the title is not a former anything but news maker of the year .
If you knew how to read you would see that Times man of the year was all of us who indulge in digital democracies and invent things on the internet to further the cause .
Sheesh! get a clue .

G West - The top 10% of wage earners pay 50% of the total income tax collected. The bottom 50% of wage earners pay 10% of total income tax collected.

Where do the rich get their income?

Where do you get yours?

I hope it's OK to give my prediction on this thread:

Liberal minority.

If the Liberals get a strong minority then even a party with very few seats could play a central role in the next government.

As G West has mentioned, a coalition only makes sense if a detailed agreement is in place before the election. And that is unlikely.

The Liberals probably feel they can win the next election, so they would be the least interested in forming a coalition.

The NDP wants to look as if it's a major player. Egos will stop it from initiating a coalition. Also, they know that if the Greens ever get a couple seats, it would be a disaster for the NDP.

Elizabeth May has stated that she will cooperate with anyone who shares common values. The Green Party, though, is trying to shake the perception that it is simply a splinter of the NDP. The Greens would find it difficult, then, to agree to a coalition that only involved the NDP.

It's all so petty and sad. If the catastrophic effects of global warming and the insanity of basing our economy on fossil fuels are not sufficient reasons to unite to defeat Harper's Conservatives, there's not much hope for us.

Time Magazine has made an unorthodox pick for person of the year: You.

As in YouTube, MySpace, Wikipedia and the other types of new media that have exploded in the past year.

"There are individuals we could blame for the many painful and disturbing things that happened in 2006," Lev Grossman, the publication's book critic, wrote in the publication's Dec. 25 edition.

But look at 2006 through a different lens and you'll see another story, one that isn't about conflict or great men. It's a story about community and collaboration on a scale never seen before. ...

"YouTube and the online metropolis MySpace. It's about the many wresting power from the few and helping one another for nothing and how that will not only change the world, but also change the way the world changes."

The magazine also identified 26 traditional newsmakers.

Among them included North Korea's President Kim Jong Il, whose country conducted its first nuclear test this year; Pope Benedict; and the troika of U.S. President George W. Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney and former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Editor Richard Stengel said if the magazine had to go with one newsmaker, it would have been Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"It just felt to me a little off selecting him,'' Stengel said.

Ahmadinejad just finished hosting a conference that featured some of the world's most notorious Holocaust deniers.

The magazine has avoided naming an individual before.

In 1966, it cited the 25-and-under generation. Women were named in 1975, and a personal computer graced the cover of the 1982 edition.

"I always love it when it's a person -- and it is a person, not a computer or something like that,'' Stengel said. "We just felt there wasn't a single person who embodied this phenomenon.''

In 2005, three people shared the cover -- the rock star Bono, and philanthropists Bill and Melinda Gates of Microsoft fame.

They were named because of their charitable work and activism in the areas of global poverty reduction and improving health.
Yea, Harpo is in good company with Kim Jong Il
and Bush,Cheny and Rumsfeld and the president of Iran .
Ooooo! such illustrious company .
Facist thugs and Pigs the lot of them .

No left nutter
If you think wage earners as a class are rich, I have a bridge I'll sell you, cheap.
Again, you know nothing.

GWest - So, you make your money selling brdiges?

I didn't say that wage earners as a class are rich, I only pointed out the facts.

I know nothing? Then I'm in good company here..........

You implied that the rich paid a lot of taxes. They don't.

You need to pay attention and study the tax laws. I can't educate you. You're going to have to do that itself. Just try not to post nonsense and I'll ignore you.

NLN
I have several for sale. Send me your bid.

Alcibiades - Suppose it depends on how you define "rich". I understand the tax laws, I don't need you to educate me, and my response was to GWest's comment -

"to make sure that the taxes are NOT paid by the rich."

I never implied that the rich pay a lot of taxes, but it is true that the 10% of the highest wage earners in Canada pay 50% of the income tax collected.

GW - A partridge in a pear tree?

It depends on what you mean by a lot. In comparison to Sweden or Norway, you're correct -the rich don't pay a lot taxes. In comparison to the US, Britain, or Japan, the rich do pay a lot of taxes. For the Tyee, you can be damn sure the rich don't pay enough taxes.

you heard it here: the NDP will merge with the Liberals. Why? Because the people will realise that the Liberals stand for...nothing. If they merge with the NDP, at least we'll know they're a left wing party.

There will be two dominant political parties in Canada, representing the right wing and the left wing: the conservative party and the liberal democratic party. The Green party will be the permanent third party as they are in many european nations, and they will continue to work internationally as their ultimate goal is a green planet.

Why should the Libs and the NDP merge? The NDP was founded by labor unions and communists. The commies are dead and the only unions left are public sector unions. The Liberals have just realised,

"oh my God -we have no values and we stand for nothing! the only thing we want is ...to win"...

NLN

Have you compared lately the proportion of total tax paid by individuals today compared with the taxes paid by individuals up until the 1970s for example? And set it against the proportion of taxes paid by corporations over the same period?

These were systems set in place by a Finance ministry whose objectives were set by people who believe in a left-wing approach to governance?

I don't think so. And that's what you wrote - to wit: That the Liberals were somehow left wing in the ways they actually administer this country.

They aren't. They are nothing but spinners, now and forever. They pretend to be progressive and left wing but, when confronted with a single move by Harper's government to stop the bleeding of Income Trusts, you see their true right wing plumage I all its resplendent glory. Moreover, you hear their wounded cries in the House of Commons – braying like peacocks.

No thinking person who understands finance could have mistaken whose toes Harper’s finance minister had trod upon.

Oh and please don’t give me any nonsense about RRSP funds making investors of us all.

That's garbage too.

acadian driftwood
from an American like you I can understand why you'd like that solution: 2 parties - easy peasey. We need more relevant parties - not fewer. Basic democracy in a pluralistic society.

I have a study somewhere which actually compares the situation of the same worker in Washington State to one in BC. You might be surprised who comes off better. There are a lot of measures besides simple tax rates which figure into such calculations.

I don't have time now, but if I think of it, I'll post some data and a link to the Pdf later.

Gwest,

holy crap, did we just agree on something?

p.s. my rrsp's have been kicking ass this year. the dow jones industrial average, nasdaq and s&p 500 all look good -you should look into it before it's too late.

GW - where to begin? I'm not a Liberal supporter. As much as they protested about income trusts they also increased government spending at unprecedented rates during the 70's, late 90's and early this decade as they sought to buy power.

The Liberals are the sleazist of all of our federal parties, willing to say or do anything to get and hold onto power.

We disagree on the matter of corporate taxation....you've never answered the question of who you want to punish by raising cororate taxes.

gwest,

actually I'm a dual citizen, born and raised in BC.

oh yeah, I still live in BC. I work on a contract basis for an american company.

acadian
Deregister your plan now, pay the taxes and I'll show you how to use the rich's rules to really make some money - you need a minimum of 100G.

And you'll have to surrender your US citizenship if you want to avoid all the tax on the 18% it'll make for you.

RRSP's are just another way the rich get working people to fill their pockets for them without actually having to use their own assets.

Another Liberal trick!

No left nutter,

As a word of advice, don't try to reason with Gwest. I haven't seen a debate yet didn't end up in a food fight.

Acadian - Thanks for the tip. I don't mind a good bun toss once in a while and I know that GW is always up for it......

Dobbin is correct. NDPers need to start considering the bigger picture of what is best for *all Canadians* over the limited and unattainable hopes, and Lilliputian political strategies (19 seats to 29? who cares?) that only mean something to the small minority in Canada that happen to be card-carrying members of the NDP.

Key to traditional NDP philosophy is that no matter what the numbers say, the Party does claim to represent the interests of the majority of Canadians, working Canadians... This is why I'm third-generation NDP.

However I'm disillusioned lately by Layton's leadership putting collaboration with Harper on "accountability" and crime ahead of collaboration with the Liberals on universal childcare and healthcare.

Again there is a very important division here between the card-carrying NDP political elite and the working masses they claim to represent. The card-carriers generally LOVE opposition, even feel more comfortable in positions of complaint or defiance, while the masses they claim to represent are actually interested in progress and having real influence over government with their vote.

Sure, having a "voice" to passionately relay my views on universal childcare in Ottawa is wonderful, but having a government that is actually interested in instituting universal childcare is infinitely better.

In the last election both Martin and Layton blew it by concerning themselves too much of their national campaigns on strategic voting and not enough on presenting real alternatives to the front-running Tories.

Telling Canadians to vote strategically, or also *not* to vote strategically, is patronizing. Generally voters want their candidate to win, their rationale is between them and the ballot box, and they don't like being told that their faculty to make an informed choice is difficient or wrong.

Harper (surprisingly) took the high road in the election by focusing on ideas, policies, strong representation, while the NDP and Liberals squabbled about TELLING people how to go about one's democratic right. Card-carrying party people get all riled up about strategic voting, but everyone else just wants to be given a choice to make!

Dobbin is right that the NDP's best hope to save/help Canada is in a Liberal minority. Let's get real. Phil Edmonston was an anomoly (and in fact his departure from the NDP fold was more telling than his arrival) and with no hopes in Quebec the NDP is simply NOT a truly national party, no matter how much you play up Jack Layton's birthplace. Anyone who doesn't realize this is living in Mouseland. Next election the NDP should focus on the seats it can actually win, which is 50 max. Layton's current attempts to work with an anti-Kyoto government are a farce. We can work with Dion for far greater benefit to all Canadians, and need to return to giving what is best for working Canadians a higher priority than selfishly aiming for a slightly higher (but still irrelevant) national percentage, or some third-place losing finishes in Quebec rather than fourth, or ten more seats.

Sinmce when did the NDP refuse to work with the Libs on healthcare and childcare?

NDP offered to work with the Libs and Martin said no, he'd go get his majority instead.

Libs had lots of majorities and chose tax cuts and transfer cuts over healthcare and childcare.

Don't want to 'punish' anyone nutter. Just have everyone treated with fairness and equity.
You have a problem with that?

betanko
Where do you and the brain and the rest of the people who post this nonsense about the 'power' of the NDP buy your foodstuffs?

There must be some kind of hallucinatory drug in it. Unless you like the visions it’s inducing you should look for another supplier.

The NDP is a marginal, barely left-wing party on one side of the political spectrum.
At best it's in 4th place in the political sweepstakes and if the Greens play their cards right even that may not last.

The mythical power the NDP has to shift its voters to the Liberals is illusory at best. Such ideas aren't possible without a carefully defined and worked our strategy and a 'real' coalition that won't allow the Liberals to be the weasels they really are at heart.

Set up a meeting, draw up an agreement and get it notarized - otherwise it's a lot of hot air and traditional NDP voters would be nuts to listen to your phony blandishments.

It's just another in a long line of Liberal cons.

ROTFLMAO at the idea that one group / individual of one political "title" could / would control / curtail the behaviours of another -take a look at the BCLibs/NDP since May 17/05 we the people got better service from MacPhail & Kwan alone than with this shadowy group. And the BCLibs have changed nothing except to hire more spindoctors and exert more control over the MSM.
The true general public sees them all as pigs at the trough "titles" be damned.

GWEST, I didn't know that peacocks "brayed" I thought that term belonged with the jackasses,- ooops, Santa might read this, the donkeys ...

HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO ALL...go and kiss,hug,and spend time with your loved ones ....Ellie aka da pitbull

Blonde Pitbull.
You may be right. I know they make a god-awful noise. I was trying to craft a metaphor that captured the dissonance between how the Liberals see themselves (beautifully elegant and highly civilized and generally lovely folks) and the actual things they do and say.

Bill Graham declaiming full-bore about the first active measure (in my memory) by any party in power to actually move against the corporations and banks who own this country and in favour of the PBT (poor bloody taxpayer) seemed to fit the peacock image so well.

Any other ideas which meet the same general program are welcomed. I think you got my point.

In addition, no doubt all the soft lefties (read compromised liberals) out there are getting us in their sights at this moment.

Get ready to duck.

And have a lovely Xmas.

G West,
A couple of interesting points, but why do you have to be so insulting in order to make them? The fact that you're presenting yourself as such a jerk trivializes anything else you have to say.

I agree that the NDP is "marginal," or at least more marginal than the card-carriers seem to think. When I saw Jack Layton celebrating the Fraser Institute's takeover of the Canadian government in January, just because the NDP picked up a mere 10 seats in the process, I was sickened.

However, our current political situation means that just a few seats, and even just a couple thousand votes in those ridings could change everything. There is a democracy at work here. The NDP may not have much "power" (and I never used that word in my last post, by the way) as a 4th party, but the people who may consider voting for them do.

I think your hopes for the Greens may be too high, however. Their chances of winning a seat anywhere are about the same as the NDP's chances of winning a seat in Quebec.

betanko

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'd say I have an affinity for the unvarnished truth. If that makes me a jerk in your eyes I'll have to live with it.

The idea that the NDP can't have any 'power' outside of a formal alliance which forces the Liberals to do what they promise seems a pretty obvious conclusion from a quick study of history.

I'm not a member of the party by the way so I think I'm perfectly free to comment.

And, as someone who considers himself a progressive, I get a little sick of people who post here more or less consistently and blame Jack Layton for Stephen Harper and his path to power.

It just won't wash. I'm in favour of real democratic reform. I know the Liberals aren't because they haven't even adopted it for their own party.

There is no democracy at work, except in the minds of people who like to fool themselves.

Sorry it it hurts. The truth usually does.

As I said to Blonde Pitbull...'you either duck or take it and fire back'. I'm tired of ducking for a bunch of phony liberals the likes of you and Terry Glavin....I think she is too.

I have no realistic hopes for the Greens unless they can get DION to sign on the dotted line. I don't think it'll happen.

Ya'll catch the move Harper made yesterday at Mirabel Airport?

LINK:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2006/12/18/qc=mirabel20061218.html?ref=rss

This is a fascinating move...much to be read into "in -between the lines".

Note the final line about Harper's own preferred election year.

P.S. Ol' P. Herr Trudeau must be spinning in his grave, he's being out Trudeau'd.... no mean feat!!!

(Sorry, I guess the "Mirabel link" is too long)

Try searching " EXPROPRIATED MIRABEL LAND TO BE RETURNED " on your search engine and refer to the CBC story .

Clearly you haven't thought through the implications of your demand for corporate tax increases. You can talk about "fairness and equity" but you can't define it.......no problem for me.

Aren't you being rather self-righteous and arrogant (and yet you chastise the Liberals!!) to be classifying your childish insults about "foodstuffs" and hallucinatory drugs to be "beauty" and "the unvarnished truth"?

And congratulations for thinking you've found one friend to share your pompous and agressive intolerance for anyone who doesn't hold your exact views. Happy holidays.

nutter
I've thought them out and I know several examples of democratic countries where the model I favour has been working famously - happiest places in the developed world.
You can check it out.

betanko
I'm sorry if you're offended. If you check back over the posts on this and other threads I think you'll find I take a lot more than I ever dish out - I'm all for a real coalition with Dion but I don't think he is what you and others think he is.

I think he's just the same old tired Liberal formula. Appeal to the world until you get into power. After that, look out for your close personal friends on Bay Street.

You might want to ask Bono how good he feels about his promo for Paul Martin now. That G8 millennium thing never got very far did it?

And I think the idea that real progressive voters should move their votes anywhere is a really bad idea.

Friendship has nothing to do with it. Liberals are 'friends' - you just had to watch their convention to get a decade's worth of that baloney.

GW, yeah I got the point you were trying to make, I just wanted to find out if that was the proper term -always looking to learn something new.
As for ducking that was and is always been a problem with me- I rarely do it. I've got the scars to prove it.
To borrow a couple from Dixie Chicks songs "I've made my bed and I sleep like a baby, no regrets and I don't mind sayin' ...." "I don't kiss the asses they told me to..."
Betanko, I don't think there's anyone on this site who would be able to call me a friend or enemy for that fact, but I do tend to agree with GW more than I disagree -is that a problem with you?

Methinks those on the Left who like to be courted so they can vote for the Libs should probably just wait till the Libs actually feel like courting you. Beyond the scary imagery of "most important election ever" and other such nonsense of course. Why buy the cow if the milk is free? Well, why promise Left-sympathetic anything if all you have to say is aren't those Cons scary?

And just as a final note, notice its only ever NDP voters who think about things like "strategic voting"? Nobody else does which is why the other parties get more votes. If NDP-inclined people would vote for the party they like the most instead of thinking they're smarter than the system perhaps the Left wouldn't be on the verge of joining the Passenger Pigeon.

In all my years in business, I've never heard of a bankrupt company buying a healthy one, unless, of course, the management are complete idiots, or crooks.

So, what say our trolls?

Good to read ya again. As for "the management", they're Three Stooges level crooks.

As for the wingnut trolls, they work on blind faith in "the system" brother. Blind, bloody minded faith.

Though they certainly are out howling at the moon here today. :-) Which is supposed to be my turf.

It reads here like the wishy-washy middle is about to implode in on itself. A fun read though-, watching the smiley face left and

, with the odd no left nut wingnut crazy thrown in for full comic relief, all trying to scratch each other's eyes out, even while they're trying out each others dresses and lipsticks.

It's all working itself up to one big, unsightly bourgeois nose pimple though-, which's gonna "POP1" here one day. :-)

Though I think I'll sit this one here out, until it gets to the main event.

If even more did that and organized themselves instead of giving head to "the man", falling for his con, and we's "non-participants" is nearly half the so-called electorate already, this neoconservative capitalism shit could all be brought to a crisis, certainly faster than all this, once more around the Maypole shit, kick-ass dealt with and over before the big dance at the NAU Bucket o' Blood Hall.

God knows I ain't takin' the ugly bitch-, or any of her ugly handmaidens either. I'd rather do my own hand job.

That is, "I'd rather do my own hand job, than get jerked around anymore by any of these assholes." m:-)

Hmmm:

Comrade Coyote:

Sh%t.....Can't sat this " TYEE " ain't the F#*K 'n bucket o' Free speech eh? ....or did Happy Hour start early. Some good ,albeit potent, lines regardless.

So, you ARE down for the GREEN Party, if I hear you right, correct ?

PS Make sure S. Freud, the Mrs. or your Minister doesn't read your past post.

can't resist this one.

go to any bank or credit union. ask to speak with a financial advisor. tell them you want to open an rrsp investing in mutual funds. 75% stocks/ 25% bonds. Ask for a balanced portfolio of low, medium and high risk equities.

You'll thank me in 25 years.

Merry ho-ho, jagoff.

(you know who you are)

acadian driftwood:
Just for you:
When you compare Canadian annual compound returns of nine per cent to 18 per cent from other global equity investments (14 per cent plus 4 per cent currency gains), the next question you should ask yourself is this: Does the tax deductibility of RRSPs and a 9 per cent return make up for the greater returns outside Canada?

The answer is no. I’ve approached this dilemma by creating an investment scenario. It’s based on a $75,000 income where the RRSP contribution is the maximum $13,500 allowed. This annual contribution, combined with the personal deduction, reduces the tax liability to an amount equal to employee withholding tax.

Over a 20-year investment horizon, an RRSP at a compound rate of 10.8% (the foreign content is maximized and earns 18%), with annual $13,500 contributions, would make $938,572.61.

Compare this with an investor who makes no RRSP contribution, pays $6,500 in taxes to the government and deposits $7,000 annually in a non-RRSP cash account. Over the same investment horizon but earning 18% on an annual compound basis, the non-RRSP would be worth $1,211,147.03.

Next question?

Had to check just what we were chatting about: politics.
All the investment advice threw me off.
I'm into golds and uranium, but who knows? Maybe Cross dresser langerei would be a better investment.

Difficult to follow this "thread"

Here is your stupid un-accountability act.
Harpo shatteered 14,of its rules his first day .
http://www.dwatch.ca/camp/RelsDec1206.html
Makes me laugh it is soooo stupid .

doggone
stay away from those mutual funds and you'll be okay - not sure how we got thereeither.

Hannibal - I see Strahl fired the head of the wheat board and appointed a toady in his place today - this one may come back and bite him in the ass too.

Gwest,

If you can get 18% per year for twenty years, then you are one shrewd dude. I use 10% as my average annual return, as this has been the stock market's average for the last 70 years or so. I'll be happy with a quarter million when I retire.

However, if you can get 18%, all the power to you.

peace out.
A.D.

I remember watching the NDP convention on CPAC for a thrill last summer. I could not believe the amount of grey hair in the audience. I especially found it ironic that they held it in the province where thay have NEVER been able to penetrate and will hence be the Party's demise. The prairies have already given up. Look at Alberta where the Green vote is rising above the NDP vote in more ridings than Murray would like to admit.
The Maritimes?
Not only is the NDP a wasted vote, it will split the left-leaners. If you really want to keep the Grits or the Conservatives "honest" or better yet responsible and accountable, vote Green. Canadians are tired of the left-right bickering without any new ideas/policies.
Each vote will help build the party and fight for what this country really needs, democratic reform -- in a MAJOR way!5 blog reactions5 blog reactions

I have beed citing demographics as the a major cause in their decline, together with policy, since I started posting on this site.

Unfortunatley, these ideas are lost on the Faithful, which is rather unfortunate as I do not want the NDP to be lost as a political party. Given its direction and lack of new ideas, I don't see much of a future for it in say, ten years.

It is time for the NDP to realise that this is 2006 and not 1996. But again, this point will be lost on the Faithful, who believe the clock can be turned back.

Then stop slagging it at every opportunity and get out and support it. Otherwise this comment is just a waste of white space working man.

If you're so full of bright ideas let's see some of them.

Anyone that values national unity is damaging it by voting NDP. The party just does not exist in Quebec and therefore they feel farther alienated by any NDP power, as well as not relating at all to any NDP sympathisers.

As for the Liberals, who was the Dion campaign director again? And who is in politics in his family?

On Mansbridge's show Dion would not say that he would exit Afghanistan, he just went on with typical Liberal platitudes, it could have been Paul Martin yabbing on about utopia and yet saying nothing!

On another topic; where do you find 18%?

Hi, Coyote:
Going out of town tomarrow. Buying a mobile home today, if I can find the time to get all the ducks in a row. Won't be back til the 28th or 29th, mainly to move! So, its next year country for that cup of coffee, but I'll look you up when I've got more time, most definitely! Have a good holiday, Coyote, and that extends to the rest of you in Tyee land. Later, brothers/sisters/comrades. :-)

G West:
Now, you knew I was talking about NDP balance of power in a future text, not a present one, didn't you? Anyways, that's the best hope the NDP has to remain a going concern. If they don't get it (and I think they will with a strong Lib minority and about 16 NDP seats), they could be in serious trouble down the road. From there, their federal future will rest on NDP provincial parties keeping the federal interests alive.

Otherwise, I have to agree with a good chunk of certain views on this thread, as well as Murray's and my own. The NDP needs to rethink its strategy in terms of being much more critical with the Harperites than they have. And if Jack doesn't carry himself better in interviews and leadership debates than he has in the past, the party could face some major damage in terms of a shrinkage in popular vote which effects everything from revenue to seats and future effectiveness in the commons. Every party needs to do some soul searching when it faces failure more than it does success. Now's the time to do it, instead of later the way the polls are coming in.

The latest poll out by the way, the one that is done for Can west with a plus/minus error of 4%, is propaganda. Leading up to the last election, these same pollsters had the Conservatives ahead by 5 to 7% more than they were, trying to create a band wagon effect. Its all a highly orchestrated Con game for Cons.

Ed Deaks posts are right on the money as well. The biggest threats to this country is multinationals and unification of U.S./Canadian interests with everything from trade to currency to defense, to you name it. And Ed Deak is right about the Fraser Institute and economic brainwashed cults teaching this destructive, I say evil, wreckless empowerment to banks and multinational corps that have bought off U.S. governments for some time and to a slightly lesser degree here in Canada. Canada's greatest nightmare? A Harper government. Its next greatest nightmare? A liberal one. The best this country can do is hope for a minority Lib government with an NDP balance of power, and some Green gains. Thats how it is, folks, and if you don't agree, its your right. But its awefully hard to find out were wrong... the hard way.

Vancouver Point Green, the NDP is the gov't Saskatchewan and Manitoba, as far as I know. Alaberta (spelling intentional) will never be NDP. Not smart enough. It is a province of youthful shallow thought, mega-greed, overconsumption of machismo toys and colossal destruction of wilderness, wildlife, arable land and--above all--water. Working there is like joining a lacerated shark in a self-consuming feeding frenzy. When it's over, the destructors and their brainless relatives will move here for keeps (instead of part-time, like now) and they'll repeat the process. They vote, too, for the shark of their choice.

From the would-be ********** Maestro,

Sh%t.....Can't sat this " TYEE " ain't the F#*K 'n bucket o' Free speech eh? ....or did Happy Hour start early. Some good ,albeit potent, lines regardless.

So, you ARE down for the GREEN Party, if I hear you right, correct ?

:-) Nope. Sober as an evangelical preacher last night Herr Maestro, though I was playing with your wingnut heads. And feeling fresh as a daisy this morning. LOL. (And I usually have a pre-supper sip of Scotch whiskey. But because of an upset tummy of late, I couldn't even have that-, and that is rare, believe me. :-)

And nope, I am not down for the Green Party or any other here. There just isn't any would-be vanguard party or party line out there that represents, near enough anyway, what would get me up to even bother to vote for any one of them. (And I have, and would again, were there something near enough satisfactory to me.) There is simply no lesser evil currently out there that is satisfactory enough to me.

And, by the by, there certainly are folks here whom I would proudly accept being called "Comrade" by. (You might want to check your dictionary, if you have one, into the actual meaning of the word.) Old Anarcho and a number of others here leap immediately to mind. We do, in fact, from time to time here in Tyee actually refer to each other as "Comrade". For we are indeed, comrades-, as comrades-in-arms, ideas and fundamental view of life and the world speaking. Which is a deeper relationship thing even than being just "friends", as even you MAY be able to understand.

I am most assuredly NOT your "comrade" however. We ain't even "friends", or in any otherwise "simpatico".

Which doesn't mean that we can't still, more or less, carry on a civilized "Tyee style", down in the mud, the blood and the beer debate. (Indeed, I think it is important that The Left have you Neocon guys 'n gals in here, so that we can contest and defeat your ideas-, such as we do here everyday. But such as the Big Money managed "electoral", so-called "democratic system" of capitalism doesn't anywhere hear allow for. :-)

In the final analysis, it's the only way in which we are eventually going to be able to get at you folks, and defeat you, is starting out in places like this, where you folks also feel drawn and compelled to engage us, and building from here. :-) It's part of the way us real comrades are going about picking our fights and fields of battle with you, our enemies.

Happy Holidays Everyone!...I now want to spend the hoidays not thinking about what the NDP is to do or what I'm going to do with my vote!
I toast you all for your {mostly} informed discussions and look foreward to 2007 at the Tyee!

realisticman
1. SO you're suggesting people vote for pee wee to support national unity.5 Seems like the only reasonable alternative given what else you've posted - I think the whole premise is flawed

Given pee wee's history, that comment doesn't even deserve a response - you're clever enough to know that so I'll drop the subject.

2. I'm in general agreement with you about Dion and there has been a good deal of evidence about his 'friends' posted here as well.

3. Keeping a strong left-wing presence in the house is the only hope we have of keeping the whole counrty independent; I suspect a lot of the kinds of people (like Cappy) who support the Conservatives actually know this and are really trying to wind the country up.

4. I don't know why you'd want to eliminate a 4th place party that's never formed the government anyway. DO you have a secret agenda too?

And the best of the Winter Solstice Season to you, Brain. Or "Christmas", if that is how you celebrate it, as most folks do, I appreciate.

I'm going through one of those periods of being busy as a kitty covering poop right now, but hopefully we will indeed get to that cup of coffee.

And the same to all you union and non-union brothers, sisters, actual friends and comrades. :-)

You agree with yourself. This is a surprise? You mean you're not wracked by inner conflict.
C'mon brain you can do better than that.

I want to know why, if the Liberals are so progressive, they won't enter a formal coalition with the NDP and the Greens to make the kinds of real changes in this country we all know are needed.

If saving the country from Harper is important - and I agree it is - it's not just the NDP supporters who have to suck it up.

This election may be the moral equivalent of war - given what happened to the Wheat Board yesterday and what I know that will mean for small family farms all across the prairies (and that's just the latest in a long list of ruinous things Harper has in mind) - it's time everyone sucked it up and made some demands of the politicians who pretend they have the interests of the country at heart.

I'm sick and tired of many of the posters here pretending that it's the NDP who needs to suck it up and vote Liberal. That’s BS. We need more progressive politicians in power – not fewer of them.

What's needed here is a coalition of the 60 - 70 % of voters who want real change in this country; people who don't believe their representatives have done a good job for a long long time; we don’t need any more phonies who pretend they are concerned about the country but who won't insist that the one party which could legitimately lead that move for change make the kinds of real moves necessary to bring about that change – namely the LIBERALS.

It's the Liberals who are playing games with you and the media brain, they're the ones who think they can hoodwink the voters one more time instead of really committing to clean up their own act and bring on real democratic reform.

I'm sick and tired of Liberal sophistry.

Drop all connections with the BC Liberal party; tell Bay Street to suck eggs - let's support some real change on the basis of a democratic partnership to save the country.

This laissez-faire stuff you're promoting - the stuff you find yourself agreeing with yourself about - just won't cut it any more.

And right back at you too Coyote!
I'm outta here for a while as well.

The Tyee Language Police delete up there was, "Braunshirt". I keep forgetting about these snoop guardians of the public's speech morals. :-) Fuk 'em.

Comrade Coyote:

Yeah,I kinda thought ya might get "Zen- sirred" based on past TYEE posts by others I have seen "Zen-sirred"

Any way...keep the P*ss and Vinegar flowing,as I do enjoy reading your #$%@** posts.

Of course I will not support the NDP because of what they did to businesses such as mine in the 1990s. That does not mean that I want to see their continued marginalization and poor performance as an opposition, particulary in British Columbia.

I don't belong to any assocation, ideaology or political party of any kind anyway.

I'd need a shot of scotch too, if I had to climb up on that warpig of a wife.

'night comrade.

You're always scolding me, talking down to me like I'm some kind of child! What's up with that? I offer opinion with defined reasons, you don't like it, so you scold me! Its always the same old redundant same "o" too... "C'mon brain you can do better than that." In all my years, I've never had anyone repeat something like this. So whats up with that?

G, its like this. Often, the large minority of the time, I don't agree entirely with myself. I think about how I've worded things, geez, I oversimplified, took it out of context, generalized, didn't make a decision based on the full truth of it, didn't define words or statements properly, didn't think outside the box, didn't see the full picture and on and on. You've seen me correct myself how many times? Apologize? Criticize my own views? I do it, buster. I second guess myself all the time. But this time, I stand firm and pat.

No conficts here, regardless of what you consider as Liberal pandering. And what are you selling, some deluded idea that the NDP should be the next minority government? Aint going to happen. Seriously, do you want another Conservative government? So tell us what better kind of idea you've got. What, the Greens are going to form the next govy? The Bloc? the NDP? Hate to say it, but Ontario doesn't think that way, and if it won't fly down east, so what do you think is better than a Lib minority with the NDP holding the balance of power?

Tell us what it is that you believe is both realistic, and at the same time the best bet? Running down what is the best option of this country? For what? Did I say "don't vote NDP?" Did I ever, in my friggin life tell people not to vote NDP? Surely... surely... you can do better than that.

And as far as the NDP really goes, they really had better suck it up. They're getting hammered in the polls, G, for a reason. It shouldn't be any great mystery, other than, "geez, the other parties aren't playing fair", or "voters are dumb", or "guy's like brain are pandering the Libs", or the "media isn't fair". You're starting to sound like a spoiled, blameless child. Surely, you can do better than that.

He acts that way with anyone not following his agenda. I hope he doesn't have any kids.

I have been saying that here for an awfully long time and the message does not get through. Nor will it. The dinosaurs died because they could not adapt; so will the NDP.

And strangely enough the "dinosaurs" that inhabit 3rd and 4th parties in the rest of the english-speaking world all suffer from the same problems as the NDP.

the brain

You still won't deal with what I think is an essential point in this debate: Why won't Dion and the Liberals, if they care as much as you say they do about the future of the country, show they care enough to sever their ties with big business? Why won’t they offer the NDP and the Greens something substantive for their support if they really want to rid the country of the prospect of a Harper majority? And why do you keep dodging the question?

You know they won't and I think you know the reason they won't. Because they care more about the elitist Liberal party and what those connections to business mean to them.

For the last three weeks you've done nothing but post how the 4th party in the house of commons is acting irresponsibly by not rolling over for Dion.

How come? As to the other point you made, I don't think it holds much water either. It isn't my fault if you're confused about what you believe in.

I don't think I've been personally critical of you; but I have tried to point out instances where I think your reasoning doesn't hold water.

You don't post utter nonsense like working man does but I still think you're wrong and I think you aren't confronting the reality of the dilemma progressive voters find themselves in.

I don't like Harper and I think I've been honest and consistent about that, but I don't believe in a Liberal party and a leader that will pander to small ethnic groups the way Dion and his faction have either. You can’t just ignore that and pretend it didn’t happen.

Murray, I basically agree with you, but I don't think that Layton, an Ontarian concerned with nabbing Liberal seats in Toronto, will be able to follow your advice. I also don't think that Greens, who now get money for votes cast, and point to 300+ nominations as a reason for being included in the Leaders' debate, are going to stand down in 30-50 seats just for a better chance of winning one seat for Elizabeth May. PR is a good carrot, though.

The problem for both "Third Way" progressives and post-materialist "New Politics" is, quite simply, that the problem in the NDP is on the left and the problem in the Liberals is on the right. This would be true regardless of who the Liberal leader is or who the NDP leader is. Vote straegically, riding by riding, and hope for a minority Liberal government in which NDP + Greens can hold the balance of power.

Dream on Mark Crawford. With all the good will in the world all of this is just wishful thinking withour a plan and a specific an binding agreement.

It won't happen and Harper WILL get his majority.

Ergo, why won't the NDP sever its ties with big labour, much of it based in the United States?

To the NDP supporters:

Please give me a resume' of what the NDP has actually done and can actually take credit for over the last decade or two..... both (i) Provincially in B.C. and (ii)Federally .

It's getting very difficult to identify much, if any.

Alcibiades, in reference to your question, I'm not suggesting anything. What I am saying is that a vote for the NDP further alienates Quebec because the NDP is just not on the map there. This is something to take into account if national unity is considered important. Were the NDP to have a strong caucus none of the shadow ministers would be Quebecers. Whether one likes it or not that's the way it is. If the intent is to embrace Quebec within Canada then support for one of their own is always needed.

As for your other question: Liberal supporters, that forget the recent past, wouldn't mind the demise of the NDP because those voters will mostly go to the Libs. PC supporters don't really mind people voting NDP because it splits the left vote.

Anyway, the NDP hasn't the numbers to bring down the government on Afghanistan and Dion says he won't. The budget might not either cause an election because Charest might call an election soon and the Bloc can't fight two campaigns simultaneously. A budget that has a goodie for the Bloc (Quebec) would keep the government rolling for while. Jack may not want an election soon either. Since Stephane has donned the green cloak, without the record to deserve it, Jack has to re-define his party as the 'real' envirosaints.

Harper is increasingly getting hip to this jig and might go super-organic himself.

realisticman
The NDP's irrelevance in Quebec is not as profound as you might think. Quebec is actually the most progressive and left-wing province in the country and the Conservatives have (with 2 exceptions) not been a significant force in the province for more than a hundred years. That hardly ruled them out as a national party.

I agree that the NDP is a marginal 4th place party - which is all the more reason why I think the people who support them and their ideas - which have traditionally been poached by the Liberals - deserve some representation and a fairer electoral process.

Those who think all the diverse interests of this country (including Quebec) can be adequately represented by 2 parties like the Liberals and Conservatives ignore Canadian history and the present circumstances - not least the situation in Quebec relative to the Bloc.

My point is that there is no difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives now (and I'll serve up Belinda Stronach, Scott Brison, David Emerson and Bay Street as my proof).

The last thing this country needs is further marginalization of the only progressive elements in our governance.

I think your analysis of the current situation vis a vis the Quebec provincial election is close to the mark. However, in the end I suspect the Bloc's attempt to force an election over Afghanistan will fail and Charest will go to the polls before the Federal vote. If the PQ wins, and I think they will, Chantal Hebert's analysis - which I sense you're following either wittingly or unwittingly - will go out the window.

There will be a budget in February I expect and the tea leaves will be ready for reading then.

In any case, for whatever reason, I expect Harper will win the election more or less whenever it happens. If the NDP gets steamrolled in that process it will be all the worse for the country. The only hope that progressive liberals, the NDP and the Greens have is a formal coalition based upon shared power and a formal set of reform policies. If the mindless reaction of most posters to the Tyee to this reality indicates a consensus in the country, we are done for.

It won't happen and we're going to lose the country because of it. At least that's my fear. And Quebec will be, before long, the only progressive and socially responsible nation in North America.

Selfishness and greed will ruin a country faster than any other ideology and we're very close to that now.

nope. wean yourself of the canadian compassion, bro. the country was founded on selfishness and greed. did you really buy that crap about investors opening up canada with a railroad so that we could all stand around holding hands singing koombayah? Our raison d'etre is the extrapolation of raw materials to sell on the world market. period. what the nabobs say on the cbc is filler. you got it backwards, bro. sorry.

You're turning out to be as big an idiot as Elliot driftwood. Without the saving grace of Elliot’s value as a sportsman.

Spending all that time in the States appears to have softened your head.

Your whole post is utter nonsense relative to the subject of this thread. Continue lighting straw men on fire if it makes you feel good.

The fact that selfishness and greed are endemic to fascist and colonial enterprise is hardly news. Community doesn't have to be what you you think it is and getting rid of the NDP would simply make things worse - crawl your way down to the nether regions as fast as you can.

I suppose your Christian dogma rewards that kind of human treachery anyway. You don't fool anyone.

maestro, the NDP hasn't had any impact on the federal scene in the past decade and a half. This was of course due to the NDP adopting the play-nice strategy of Alexa and Audrey and being all friendly with the Liberals. Almost wiped the NDP off the map. With Layton, the NDP has returned more to its traditional (Tommy Douglas) "black cat, white cat" treatment of the Libs and has gained seats. However, even Layton's limited successes on the federal agenda begin and end with Martin temporarily having to cozy up in order to stay in power. Unfortunately Martin couldn't stomach moving to the left when he was more comfy doling out tax cuts for Bay Street and so the NDP influence was very short-lived.

Provincially the NDP is not as left-wing but I think the NDP record in gov't speaks for itself. Doing what was necessary to avoid passing on the federal Liberal cuts to social transfers and health care etc at a time when even rich Alberta was gutting the system. As for those who screamed deficit, they were somehow quite happy with Campbell's record deficit. Socially, health-wise and education-wise the NDP did more during the cutbacks of the 90's than the provincial Libs have done during a time when the feds have been throwing money at the province.

I repeat, you heard it here first: the NDP will merge with the Libs and they'll be called the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party). Remember, it's not so much what you say, but can you prove what you say? Do you have a vision of the nation?

The NDP, borne of unionism, has run its course, and it is finished. kaput. only public sector unions, whiners and folks who demand handouts support the ndp. last night ran a story on the news of a woman bawling her eyes out because daycare was too expensive. well, too bad. It's called personal responsibility. nothing's free. suck it up. You want to tax me (take my money) to support your kid? are you nuts?

the Libs as I've said before stand for nothing except...whatever wins.

So if you really want a genuine opposition to the Cons, a Lib-ndp merger is it. You're just pissed of because there's a new sheriff in town, and you can't stand it. Tough. Take your shameless opportunism liberals and your class warfare ndp and shove it. you have no principles, you stand for nothing. Harper and the Cons will form the next majority. See ya later and good riddance 'compassionate' canadians. Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.

Acadian driftwood:
Where's all that Christian charity you were selling a few days ago?

In fact you and elliot are obviously brothers in arms.

You wouldn't know a principle if it slapped you in the face. Hang onto your yankee dollars, it's all you'll ever have with that kind of an attitude.

I love it when guys like you and Cappy and Ron Erwin show up. It does more for the objective of changing people’s minds about Harper's phony benevolence and his real plans for this country than anything I could ever say or do. You can tell a man that boozes by the company that he chooses, so to speak.

Keep it up fella. You aren't worthy of such a fine and gentle name.

Frank:

Thanks for putting forward your thoughts re: the NDP , always look forward to your views ( and those of others as well ).

While THE TYEE has facilitated much discussion of the political scene amongst other issues, I've been thinking about the " NDP = ____? " issue for quite a while.

I keep coming up with " Spotted Owl Party " etc.
Are we concerned about the NDP for posterity sake...simply some sort of historical political "feel good" artifact we don't wish to see go the way of the DoDo?

In my view, the NDP really has nothing quantifiable to add to the discussion as Opposition. Anyone can soap box rant about "we need to save the environment" ...BUT what's the actual PLAN?

Or Medicare...anyone can rant about the need for reducing lineups...when people live longer and technology advances , costs go up. So, AGAIN, what's the non- ranting hard copy of an NDP PLAN .... or do vested interests support the NDP on that and other similar fronts ?

In some ways, perhaps the NDP should fold and resurrect / evolve into some sort of lobby/advocacy group as opposed to a political party on life support.

In many ways it seems like a more long term version of a leadership convention...the LAST place party is next on the viablity chopping bloc. As an example, I can remember when the Communist party used to run candidates,yet haven't heard of them for years.Toast?

Unfortunately , the NDP, in my view, really has nothing much to add anymore when in Opposition , and at least provincially, when actually in power, its been a disaster, and simply catering to its " core support" in its own version of " Members only " invitation to the Public Trough, yet accuses others of similar conduct ?!?!

NDP ? .....as a relevant political force = R.I.P.

Time to pull the plug ?

Seems to me for some strange reason it's a knee-jerk equating by many with a political version of a quasi- " snake-oil cure -all " ?

Whether in Opposition , or in power ,the NDP in my view isn't capable of doing either ,thus time to enter the real world, they have been on probation long enough, hence services no longer required. No tears shed , crocodile or otherwise.

thank you maestro, couldn't have said it better meself.

Gwest,
there you go again. thinking you have a monopoly on compassion. as if you speak for johnny canuck. Far as I can see, you're bereft of ideas. go ahead and stand on the sidelines and complain, that's effective. you have nothing solid, no plan, agenda, or vision. you're a real leader. What say you? Vote Liberal? ok, fine then -but you don't say why. because they are, in your opinion, compassionate? Sez who? Keep it up pal, people like you will let the cons get a majority next go round.

by the way moron,

who will follow you when you offer no ideas when you post?

Many people use facts when they post to give substance to their argument. You suck ass big time, numbnuts. Why don't you make an earnest attempt to persuade the reader you're intelligent? You're compassionate -is that all you got? Then say why the Liberal party is compassionate, and much taxation equals compassion. It's not free, is it?

one other thing: christian charity? who said that? did I say I was christian or charitable? write the appropriate thing to the appropriate person, jagoff.

I am not a christian. I smoke pot. But ya know, that guy really did kick yer ass in the Crozier debate.

harper's phoney benevolence?

that's just it, ya toolbag. He ain't pretending! Is that what you seek in a leader?

ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Thanks driftwood - saved me the trouble of posting your kind of 'benevolence' from our previous encounter.

Keep it up. You are the best advertisment I know for the position that voting for Harper is insane.

Just drift on back to the States - you'll be so much happier their.

As I said, you and the other neocons make my arguments far more fundamentally than anything I could say.

Keep it up. Can't you think of anything more ad hominem than that?

Oh and the Crozier debate:
I'll post the link so people who actually do think can decide for themselves.

That will be fun.
http://thetyee.ca/Books/2006/12/05/LornaCrozier/

Spelling & grammar police.

I noticed the 'their' - forgive me. I was in a hurry.

I always like to comment on Murray's article but this one has gotten away from me.
Guess I'll just second what G west said

AD:

And Christians didn't do this? Pot over the centuries has been like myrrh and frankincense. It's only yer Amerikan "businessmen" who got it outlawed to increase the bottom line. Definitely an anti-Christian move if there ever was one.

Alcibiades;
'The NDP's irrelevance in Quebec is not as profound as you might think".

7 December, 2006,..latest Decima Poll-GPC surpasses NDP in Quebec. In Quebec the GPC is at 9% - more than double the NDP support of 4%.

That's down from 7.5% in the last election, or around 100,000 voters out of around 15 million voters in Canada.

Once again, no seats. Next time, no seats. Relevant - you tell me.

Realisticman:
I guess you didn't read anything but the first sentence.

This is what I actually wrote:

The point is really a question about names being largely irrelevant. I don't care what 'party' manages to create a more humane and socially responsible society anywhere in Canada.

The NDP should be concerned with values and not labels, in my view. That the people of Quebec have managed to find a way to achieve those ends in their home province is the important thing for a real progressive.

I'd be more than happy to see the NDP pass into history if it were replaced by another more effective champion of the rights and needs of people - in Quebec the PQ seems to have done that very nicely and I applaud them. The NDP is not needed in Quebec but that doesn’t make the ideals it represents irrelevant. In my view that’s what really matters.

The problem at the Federal level is that, save the NDP and left-wing Greens, there is no other party who gives two cents for the values I believe in.

The Liberals pretend to do that but it is nothing more than a pretense - and that's the problem.

I could care less about your definition of relevant - my concern is with results.

How many times do I have to say I'd be happy if the NDP and the Greens were to enter a formal coalition with the Liberals?

I just have some very specific terms to such a deal; terms I've also explained very clearly.

The problem with many right-wingers is a profound inability to read and understand.

I won't say that's typical of you, but you know what I mean. There are more important ways of evaluating results than vote percentages and seats. I’d suggest you look at the actual ‘relevance’ of many of the enduring social programs and progressive pieces of legislation in this country which got their start as CCF and NDP policies and programs.
That’s real relevance – even though the solipsistic Liberals pretend that these things came from them. Honest women and men know the truth.

When I lived in Notre-Dame-de-Grâce a few years ago I was one of I think 700-odd people who voted NDP. I didn't see myself as irrelevant either.

Gwest,

chew on this:

you're not here so that people will like you, nor are you here to make friends. If you are, you really are a toolbag. You're here to make a case and persuade people you are credible. Who said one had to be benevolent? Now you say Harper is insane. Oh? Yet you fail to list the reasons why you believe this. You presume, just because you said it, it must be true.

I have told you before to substantiate your case with evidence. Prove to the reader you can.

oh yeah, the Crozier debate, thanks. You sure did get your ass kicked. I bet it hurts. Didn't I tell you already: it's not what you say, but can you prove what you say?

think about it.

...and you weren't irrelevant, perhaps insignificant-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things, from a mathamatical perspective of course. No matter whether the voter is in Quadra, Westmount or a couple of streets across Decarie in NDG, their vote counts.

And where, precisely, did I write that?

Your reading ability, in addition to your lack of judgment and view of reality appears to be in some serious jeopardy.

Too much pot perhaps?

Further, I'd suggest, acadian driftwood, that you might be the one who should, as you so aptly put it - 'think about it'.

You are currently in danger of tripping over your own tongue.

Let me know when you have things back under some kind of nominal control.

A point I'd agree with, realisticman. And the reason I won’t be voting Liberal without a formal coalition agreement. Standing firm for one’s ideals and values is far more important than some facile notions about ‘strategic’ voting.

A fact I think is not enough appreciated by many voters, no matter where they cast their ballots.

As someone with a western Canadian background, I found Quebec a fascinating and humane and progressive place - with the possible exception of many Quebecers' driving habits and their propensity to use tobacco as if it were 'good' for them I have very little to criticize about my years there.

I wish our communities here in British Columbia shared some of the same spirit and openness that my Quebec friends extended to me.

thanks for the link...i see alcibiades got his ass kicked, too.

lemme give you a tip: the reader doesn't care what you believe. they wanna see if you can prove what you believe. do you see the difference? Good.

As for being a christian -nope, got that wrong. I'm a pagan pothead.

as for being an american -nope, bc born n raised.

you can't figure me out, can you bitch? Be a man and admit you lost crozier's debate. I mean, you got slapped hard!

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!

I lived in Montreal for two years: blvd st laurent and NDG. Great city.

Enjoy the conversation with yourself acadian driftwood - trolls like you aren't worth a moment's time - I'd say you and Elliot would make a perfect pair. I'll introduce you to him the next time he stops by.

Thanks for removing any doubt that you might have something worthwhile to say.

Nya -nya Na Nya Nya!!!!!!

you're just pissed cuz you got your ass handed to you in a bag by GKL. I just finished reading the debates and man, you were on the ropes. Fact is, I agree with you. But you lacked the intelligence to prove your case. Sure, I knew what you meant, everyone has the right to do as they please, equal rights, etc. etc. But that wasn't the question, was it?

verdict: you lose.

The problem of deciding who to vote for would largely vanish if we had a much better voting system. The best one is one which allows you to express your preferences and also gives close to proportional representation. This is formally known as STV, for single transferable vote. It was the choice of the BC Citizens' Assembly, and one can hope it will also be the choice of the Ontario Citizens' Assembly.

The problems raised in the story have been us for as long a I can remember and will remain until we get such a voting system. The problem is how to get the politicians in Ottawa to institute it for elections to the Canadian Parliament. If we got it they would lose power, so we cannot expect them to institute it without a big push from the public. Anything people can do to help will help us all.

Thank you David for your comment---any form of PR (or even AV majoritiarian) would radically change the "split" and "wasted" vote phenomenon, and make it much more difficult for a clearly minority view such as Harper's to turn into a majority government. Right now, our lives are ruled by the fact that (unlike a few years ago) the center-right is now more united than the center-left.

QUOTE :

" The problem with many right wingers is a profound inability to read and understand " .

The problem with many LEFT wingers is a profound ability to read TOO much and understand little....or a profound inability to read BETWEEN the lines and yet claim to understand...or basically the same old condescending Bullshite which ultimately adds up to poorly masked denial.

" I read, therefore I Yam-sky Leftie-off. "

Proportional representation - preferably by mixed member representation is much better than STV. The CA made elitist assumptions and presented 'their' own preference rather than giving the people a real opportunity to make a decision about what was best for the actual voters. The fact that there are still folks out their promoting 'their' ideas is a good indication that the process itself was flawed and compromised. Way too much pride in the product for something done as a 'public service'.

Even so, despite it's shortcomings, STV would be better than what we have.

I think the BC Citizen's Assembly made a huge mistake in its deliberations. However, its not really their fault as much as it is the fault of the way the process was designed and structured in the first place.

Even though it was designed to fail, it almost resulted in an actual change to our failed FPP method.

In the end however, this may be for the best since perhaps we'll get it right next time.

Ahh, utter nonsense. Anything you do not agree with.

If your ilk could listen to anybody but your supporters, you might actually occassionally form a government.

You don't win elections by preaching to the choir.

Stunning revelation isn't it? I am sure you think it is utter nonsense.

Maybe it is utter nonsense but you are not going to see Smilin' Jack or Carole (welfare welfare union union) James form a government anytime in the next ten years, are you?

Working man.
You know I don't think you're an idiot and that I don't put you in the same challenged company with Elliot and Cappy (Ron Erwin has a whole category all for himself).

Nevertheless, as far as choral singing is concerned, I think your constant refrain of GLEN GLEN GLEN in reference to a short-lived premier of this province who sold out to jimmy the p more than 6 years ago is a little preachy - since you've brought it up.

If you actually read my posts you’d find I'm far from doctrinaire in the sense you mean; and, I do know how the economic, financial and tax system works in this country.

Something I've had to correct in your posts more than once if you recall.

I see you've added a coda to your little song: welfare, welfare, union, union.

Which makes a nice change.

The point is, you almost never post anything rational or thoughtful - ergo - nonsense. The few times you have, I think you'll find I've replied in kind.

I just have problems with people who have such a pathological take on life and the ideals and hopes of his fellow men and women.

You've been doing it from the first time I noticed your posts ....that's what is really tiresome.

As to changing the government here: I don't know what will happen in the future, I do know that if we don't get rid of the current bunch in this province that there will be nothing left for people who need a government of service because all our provincial assets will have been transferred to a small circle of the premier's close personal friends.

And THAT, is not [I]utter nonsense/I]

actually no- you are doctrinaire.

anyone you don't agree with is a:

1.bigot
2.misogynist
3.right-wing wacko
4.christian nut-job
5.american
6.insane
7.pathological take on life.
8.irrational
9.unthoughtful

you can rope-a-dope for a little while but you're gonna get clocked, G. You are a Liberal. You seek to shore up support from the NDP. Why can't you say this? Last I checked, there's nothing wrong with that. That you are somehow 'above the political process is crap'...

hmmmm....

the province, currently, is in the best economic shape in it's history

OR

double-digit unemployment with the ndp in the 90's, with sweetheart deals for public sector unions, and the audacity to claim they have a monopoly on 'compassion'...

hmmmm, which do you prefer?

acadian driftwood

Now that is funny! You can’t seem to read either.

As to the shape the province is currently in, Gordon and his friends are certainly doing well - the rest of the province, not so much. The future – God help us!

I won't even glorify your other point with a comment. You clearly know about as much about economics and commodity prices as you do about RRSP investments.

That list of things you've provided is a reasonable description of yourself, by the way.

you're falling into your own trap. people know what I am. conservative.

yet you say you're neither conservative, liberal, ndp or green.

how convenient. you're a real leader. way to take a stand.

you do complain about the province, though, and offer no solutions -again, leadership in action.

regarding rrsp's, denial aint just a river in egypt, pal. i whipped you soundly on that point. nobody gets 18%/year for twenty years.

so ya think by not taking a stand, not backing a political party -the reader will respect that? you really are a toobag.

says acadian driftwood
Keep that kind of posting up -
I'm sure the 'reader' will be impressed with you!

- You didn't actually read that investment example did you? It doesn't matter what the yields are - it's the effective return ratio relative to the two investment scenarios that counts. Just keep putting that money in your RRSP - but don't forget you'll pay tax on it, at God knows what rate, when you finally cash it in...and the corporate thieves who are buying up BC's and Canada's assets are using your money to finance it in the interim.

And the 18% - if you have 100G I can show you where you can get it tomorrow, guaranteed - paid in monthly cash flow increments. However, you'll have to give up your US citizenship or you'll be taxed in the US on your international earnings.

That's the difference between ordinary people and the masters of the universe - special rules for them - or no rules at all.

As to not taking a stand, whose posts have YOU been reading?

Given the old saying re: DEMOCRACY is the worst form of Government .....except its BETTER than all the rest.

The NDP doesn't get to First Base on that Democracy front...and Spring Training starts in about 2 months.

Dr. Jack Kervorkian is apparently eligible for parole soon...perhaps Medicare aka the Public System can make allowances for the NDP to jump the queue for an appointment ........unless , of course , he opens a Private Clinic. (Let's then pass the hat around).

This topic is about the NDP...many of the mainstream parties both Provincially and Federally have undergone purges and rebuilt....the ol' Phoenix mode .

Friendly Advice to the Left...start O-V-E-R...... This is getting monotonous... the Left often stagnates as it gets stuck in the mud and bald tires spinning. The Left can be more Elitist than the parties they criticize. Oxford should use the aforementioned to add to the nouveau definition list of "The Left" .

Neo - Con ?

Left = " CON -Con" ...or perhaps "King Con Con" ....as it climbs to the tallest soapbox and beats its chest with the "Fay Wray -esque" manifesto in hand.

I've heard the same rhetoric based speeches for decades.

Look in the mirror , it's time to move on.

Sounds like Churchillian bs to me maestro.

I thought you'd foregone rhetoric.

If we actually had some democracy and not corporate plutonomy I might agree with the sentiment; for the moment, it's idealistic nonsense.

And, with that 'its' usage you are courting the Spelling & Grammar Police.

G West:

The "Law of Gravity" can be rhetoric, as the saying goes, but if the shoe fits wear it...aka the " Democracy quote" in my past post survived the test of time and still applies.

One person's rhetoric is another's...well.... you get the point.

There is useful rhetoric and then there is same old collecting- dust- in- the- recycling -bin- time- to -archive -it "type".

PS Season Greetings to the Spellink n' Gramm'arrhhh Poelease and Red- toe - rick Po'lice.

Stay tuned gang. I hear that Murray's next tome will lay out the strategic plan for a North America wide national strike in January, calling for all the banks and all the energy companies world-wide to be nationalized and run by Jack Layton.

G West, try highlighting the text and then hitting the little slanty I thing between the big B and the U

gwest,

I'll try not to be such an ass, although it's hard.

in all sincerity, you want democracy and not plutocracy. good-me too. then what's wrong with an elected senate? isn't the exercise of voting an act of power, to have control over how one chooses to live one's life, to have a representative voice those interests?

Not unless it's real representative democracy where the actual wishes of the people get represented by proportional membership in the legislature - adding another layer of First Past the Post elected Senators to the mix won't help, believe me.

Dump the Senate entirely and elect the House of Commons on a proportional basis.
Currently the act of voting is an expression of fruitless activity for the members of the voting public who don't support the two old-line parties vision of the status quo.

Why do you think so many young people are so utterly unengaged in the political and democratic process?

In order to have any influence they have to be either a slightly relaxed version of Stephen Harper's Reform dictatorship or part of the yuppie/business/feel good Liberal crowd we saw declaiming about how wonderful they are during the first weekend in December.

That other huge chunk of the unwashed are citizens too and it's long past time they had some input into the way this country is being sold down the river by a never ending parade of bought and sold politicians.

Working man - I know the drill! There is a screwed up line of code on most of the HTML tags in many of these threads. To get them to work properly you have to cut and paste - I inadvertently snipped a square bracket.

I wish someone would fix the damn thing. Thanks anyway. Try it, you find yourself creating a line of text between the tags you didn’t intend.

maestro, (been gone a few days)

You say the NDP has been a disaster whether in government or in opposition. I disagree but if what you say is true why would you want it to go away? Provincially that would leave us with a one-party state which I admit is pretty much what we've had historically since the NDP has only won 3 times, but still it would look bad wouldn't it?

As for the NDP having nothing to say on the subject of the environment or medicare, I think they do have something different to say. I don't see another party saying or doing the same things. Why would you want to limit democratic choice to one party? It'd be like me saying the Conservatives should be disbanded because they rarely ever win a federal election.

provincially, the liberal party is actually a conservative party. they should change their name. the ndp was borne of unionism, but the percentage of the population belonging to a union has shrunk significantly. they claim to speak for 'working people' -but that could mean anyone -from a barista to a carpenter to a public servant in the ministry of highways. they also claim to be environmentalists...so what are they? they are just people who want to...win.

get rid of 'em. they offer no alternative. In fact, they should change their name to the liberal party -then they could be center left, instead of just left.

The NDP having a stance on both the environment and labour makes it different from other parties? How? Both the Cons and the Libs have more than one issue they claim an interest in.

As for the Libs, they're a long way from being Left, or even centre-left.

You're kidding, right?

The NDP knows it can't win. The best it can hope for is slowly convincing people - especially in circumstances where the other parties are compromised and incompetent - that there is a better way. Hanging on until there is a more equitable way of voting for the people we want to 'serve' us in parliament. You are right about Liberals and Neocons – they are no different.

Frank:

Don't get me wrong, any Democracy needs a good healthy opposition. Key word is good. Good then leads to healthy...

In reflecting back. the NDP had a monopoly as THE "Opposition" on the Provincial scene, and on the Federal scene it has sort of peaked as well . The NDP now has competition,and I am not sure it can handle sharing that sort of Leftie crown/title. Any move it makes nowadays can easily disenfranchise its own support, versus its own support historically really had no other choice and would perhaps tolerate many foot- in- mouths and other indiscretions.

In my view, too many of the TYEE Lefties seem to dance around " The great Left Opposition Hope = NDP " , thus "implying" support for the NDP yet apparently avoiding saying it directly up front. Perhaps it is best referred to as the equivalent of " Politically Homeless ".

The NDP has apparently relied on core special interest groups for its funding and its support, and once this fades away,which I think it is, what does the NDP really represent except special interests groups from the Left side of the political spectrum? Rank and File union members do not all vote NDP, many actually don't , hence it seems only the Union Leadership allies themselves to the NDP.

Clinging on to the NDP for no other reason than historically being the Opposition or the umbrella party for Left wing ideology will not buttress it but will simply continually undermine and erode it. The Greens, in my view, and as I have said before, remind me of the NDP 30 + years ago...but I don't think they will result in a rebirth of a quasi- NDP. Even Corky Evans was quoted in the paper as saying the Greens are almost like a radical tree hugger cult, at least in his riding.

In the end, the NDP will probably fade away and its politically -homeless supporters " hold their noses " and vote for the other alternatives on the Federal scene ..ie a left -of -center Liberal or perhaps even a centrist Tory party. As an example, the Federal Liberals could in fact, attract Tory support if they didn't rely on and hence taint themselves with the old BS LIEberal way of doing business, hence fall into the same trap as the NDP.

Or..... If Tories read the political terrain properly and perhaps put forward a PLAN re Environment that will appeal to the R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L voters, they will have dealt a powerful body blow to the LIEberals and a good kick in the groin to the NDP.

Provincially, the NDP always seems to need a major screw up by the party in power and become Gov't by default, that's been the historical pattern, but that method is nothing to write home about either.

Carol James hasn't really given us any major reason "yet" to be concerned that she is a chip off the old Leftie block ala the previous NDP Gov't, but then again when the rubber hits the road the Great Unknown can be a liabilty and its the old " Devil You Know" card in play again. In my further view, I find both her and Jack Layton like two peas in a pod...quite conservative and in some sort of neutral holding pattern..treading water?

The NDP shouldn't rely on Voters "charity" A-N-Y-M-O-R-E.

Evolve or else die off and f-a-d-e a...w.......a.........y.............

maestro:

What kind of breakfast cereal do you eat?

I don't think I've ever read 550 words of text quite so full of cliches.

Is it the 'Sugar Pops' that give you that facility?

maestro, I don't disagree with much of your analysis. The NDP relies on its core just as much as the other parties. The core of the NDP just happens to be smaller because it appeals to fewer interest groups than the Libs and Cons do. Also, NDP interest groups don't have the financial resources of those that support the Libs and Cons either.

And I also agree that the NDP only wins provincially by default. That's what I meant earler by saying we're really just a one-party province like Alberta. But the existence of the NDP provides some legitimacy to the process simply by contesting elections regardless of almost always losing.

Federally, other parties exist so the NDP can't win by default. In fact its the Conservatives who win only by default federally. I found it just as disheartening as I'm sure many conservatives did to see the Cons only win a minority after the Libs were literally caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Yet, although the Cons only win when the Libs screw up big I think they should still exist because otherwise our federal politics wouldn't be much different from a dictatorship.

Where I do disagree with you is that you think the NDP can die. It can't. Its simply a political vehicle for those of us on the Left. We may be small in numbers but through the NDP we can still voice our opinions and influence people's thinking and move society towards the left on some issues. Without the Left this country would never have made the progress it did in regards to social issues and the safety net. Just as the Cons represent a segment of the population that requires a voice in spite of winning federal elections only by default.

So even if James and Layton threw in the towel tomorrow (along with the gov'ts of Sask and Manitoba) the Left would still exist and would still require a political vehicle to influence the thinking of the nation. Removing the NDP removes our voice and removes our influence. This is what happens when NDP voters support the Libs to keep the Cons out of power.

Comrade G West:

Re: Cliche's ,anecdotes and analogies:

I think the evidence is becoming increasingly overwhelming that you, G West, have( either on call, OR subcontracted, OR within your direct employ ), the dreaded INFINITE amount of Monkeys typing INFINITELY on an INFINITE supply of typewriters.

It is not OTHERwise possible for one to have the time and resources to be so eternally vigilant and keep on top of issues, comments, do the homework and research , ....debate,...continually lick your wounds..... send Xmas and Birthday cards to "Ron" and " Cappy"....maybe even Acadian D...... now making poor ol' " The Brain" walk -the -plank ,....yet still agree with most of the others on the TYEE (ie Lefties = redundant) and still do your Xmas - Hannukah shopping ......and then already lined- up for Boxing Day sales but pontificating to those behind you in line about Leftie ideology, yet not sensing their resentment is a combination of BOTH " WTF is this BS ? " AND the fact you butted into the line, .....much like the Public Health Care system for the terminal hangnail because the Private system was closed.?

We're on to you Dude...

Questions:

(i) Do you pay these monkeys UNION wages?

(ii) If not, what 3 rd World sweatshop do they work from?

(iii)If they want to organize and form a Union, what size baseball bats do you intend on ordering ?

(iv) are the Bananas you feed them organic ? Global Warming will inevitably increase production and lower prices and thus lower overhead.

(v) Will Gordo, Dubya, and Steve H. be there at the ribbon cutting for the " G. West Shelter" in West Van ?

PS How's that 87' import car running ? Know the tricks on how to fool Air- Care?

Hi Frank:

I'll respond to your comment...I had to respond to comrade G West's post first...looks like he butted in, as usual ,..... and as usual, probably thinking my response wasn't in a serious mode .

maestro - It's probably outsourced in Bagalore.

maestro,

I agree with you regarding the ndp. all over eastern europe socialism has died. the fiery crucible in which the ndp was born has gone out. No one can claim to speak for the 'ordinary' or 'working' family. Who isn't ordinary or working? I give 'em ten years -max, and then they'll merge with the liberal party.

Frank:

I suppose if I didn't think a Democracy needs to provide a voice to all within it, and that a good check and balance ie a good "Opposition" ,whether it be "Offical or UNoffical opposition, I guess I would say NOTHING and let the process follow the natural road to oblivion.

As one of my colleagues said to me , when he worked for a huge corporation that had to evolve on an almost daily basis, when they had meetings, there was no such thing as a "bad " idea at the very start of a meeting or project, ...they are all tabled, then at the end the best consensus has to be reached for the hopefully " best collective goal".

The "in - between" the start and the finish is where the action and politics etc occurs, but again hopefully a good discussion and debate in the process , the devil in the details, filtering etc. occurs

Now, I do think many within the NDP or their supporters are sincere, likely altruisitic and humanitarian ,etc etc. at last at the start. However, the $ Million question = HOW do they morph the ideology into a realistic application that benefits society ?

Unfortunately, the term "NDP" sends shivers down the spines of many...the NDP when it is in power seem to ad nauseum feel that the "Hammer and Sickle" approach of LAWS/ LEGISLATION can make things happen . Actually, the Hammer and Sickle approach often used by the NDP can be very counterproductive .

As I have said in various past TYEE posts the Provincial BC NDP had about 8 year in power,most of the 1990's , the Vancouver Homeless problem could have been addressed with the old WoodWards redevelopemnt...a multi -level multi- pronged social /societal project, ie provide social housing,..employment, apprenticeships..when the economy was depressed,...and a social housing working model to be fine tuned etc. etc.

However, unfortunately, every time I bring a REAL WORLD EXAMPLE like this WoodWard possibility, the TYEE Leftie posse' says bugger all.

No wonder WAC Bennett said the Lefties/NDP couldn't run a peanut stand.

To me the NDP has lost its "Name Brand" appeal...its living on old so-called laurels, if they ever were laurels versus Poison Ivy .....and appeals to armchair idealogues sans pragmatists.

Idealogues can chant future revolution LOL ..and class warfare LOL...here on the TYEE..."We MUST_____" LOL .....seems to me on par with that old Peter Seller's movie "The Mouse that Roared".

Think of the NDP along the lines of a Business...the Business of selling your political party services as we the people, ALL of us collectively = Gov't, ....the old model of "Gov't: To Serve the Public".

NDP sales pitch = promise the Moon? and can't even get to First base with 4-0 count ? Yeesshhh !

The NDP today is yesterday's model...and more like a Ford Pinto from the early 1970's, if you catch my inference. Most Voters know better and don't trust it any more, even it's old supporters,which indicts it more , and in my view it was inevitable, but often they, the given dinosaur, are THE LAST to see it and ultimately only themselves to blame, NO ONE else.

However, all over western Europe "democratic socialism" has endured and is in little danger.

The Cdn Left could never merge with the Libs. It would be like merging with the Cons as I see the Cons as simply being "Liberals in a hurry".

maestro, your corporation example is exactly what I'm trying to get across as to why the NDP will continue to exist. Your friend says a bunch of people get together and there's no "bad" ideas. Everyone puts forward their thoughts and they hammer out a consensus.

Okay, so now think of Canada as being that corporation and each of the people at that meeting being a political party. The end of the NDP simply means less input. It means that there will be one less voice putting ideas forward.

Now I'm sure many Libs would be quite happy if the NDP disappeared because it would mean one less voice around to disagree with their own point of view. Even now the Lib-Cons generally do not adhere to your corporate example, all voices to the left of the Libs are treated as "bad" ideas.

I understand many hate the NDP, just as many hate the Cons and many hate the Libs. But I don't question the reasons why those other parties exist.

As for the 1990's, I'm generally happy with the record of the provincial NDP. Certainly could have been more left-wing in my view but I'm well aware of the constraints the Feds dumped on the provinces so I understand the limits. Overall I would rather have accessed health care in 1995 than 2005.

You really want me to highlight the cliches in that post Maestro?

Your only serious posts are short ones.

When you start to roll out a long line of meaningless stuff it's always interspersed with cliche.

I'd like to hear what you have to say if you can figure out what it is.

sez acadian driftwood

Replaced by thug gangster governments ruled by criminal oligarchs.

Some improvement!

Last election a lot of people said vote for the NDP because the Libs need a rest, and what can the conservatives do with only a minority?

Well, I think we are seeing what Harper can do with a minority. What matters most in the next election is that he doesn't get the majority he seeks. The best way to do this is to vote for Dion Liberals wherever they can win.

- C

I don't think Harper has done much of anything the Liberals wouldn't have got around to doing themselves eventually. The exceptions concerning the income trusts, the accountability act and senate reform of course. The Liberals are against increased taxation on corporations, accountability of any kind and parliamentary reform of any kind.

I think the Libs would have continued their child care plan Frank, which was certainly better than the payoff to stay-at-home moms that we have now.

On the other hand, after the caterwauling in the house over income trusts I'd have to say they wouldn't have made any change in that area. Is that a saw-off?

Other than that, we'd still be in Afghanistan and still pumping out info about non-existent programs to limit greenhouse gases.

I think you're about right. Liberals just don't like being out of power. In that respect, David Emerson is a perfect model for them.

G, if the Libs had brought in their child care plan back in 1997 or something I'd give them credit for it, but since they seemed to only discover child-care when they needed to win an election I tend to place that little drama on the same shelf I'm going to place Harper's coming conversion to being "green".

And I agree about Emerson, he was able to switch from being a good Liberal to a good Conservative without skipping a beat or changing his mind on anything.

Definitely not much to pick between the two of them. Liberals probably hate being out of power more. What Conservative tendency could we balance off against that?

Well, whereas Liberals have shown they can go 5 years without doing anything substantive because they expect to win every election the Conservatives can't because they know their time is short. Which makes them look like they have more of an "agenda" than the plodding Libs and makes them seem a little scarier.

By the way, for my new year's prediction I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the release of Harry Potter book 7 will eclipse anything going on politically for many Canadians in 2007 :-) Especially among the third that doesn't vote.

That's right, the Liberals talked about a national child care programme for, what was it, ten or more years. The Conservatives actually did something. Some may not like it but thet acted instead of continuing to promise , and seriously promise just befor each election. The Liberals became really serious just when they thought the jig was up. It was too late.

The conmen did something all right.

But they didn't create a childcare program either realisticman - that’s just silly - it's only a pander to Harper's base - everybody knows that. I think though, if anyone deserves credit for the 'program' the Liberals 'created' it would be the NDP and not the Liberals.

I must remember to mention that the next time working man tries on that lie about Layton being 'responsible' for Martin's defeat in the house and the subsequent election.

Without Layton's 'encouragement' the previous spring the Liberals wouldn't even have had the 'framework' of a plan that pee wee was reluctantly forced to finance for one year. We'd just have had another useless reduction in corporate taxes.

Excellent point, realisticman.

Gwest,

I noticed something in your response to maestro, and it occurred to me -you must be 10, possibly 20 years older than me. Why else would it bother you to speak of the ndp's collapse?

The younger generation knows nothing of solidarity, trade unionism, the 8 hour day, worker safety, etc. etc. They just assume it was always there. Thanks to folks like you (I'm guessing) -we have these wonderful, hard-fought, workers' rights. They are encoded in law.

But maestro is right. No one rallys around a hammer and sickle anymore. Workers have more rights than they've ever had in history.

Furthermore,

the language you use, ie.,

1. 'let's stick it to the man'.
2. down with the system!
3. hell no, we won't go!

etc., ect.

this will only help people like me get harper his majority.

Once again, thanks for the battles you waged on behalf of the working class, we appreciate. But as a rank and file union member myself, I can tell you no one talks like this anymore. If you want to help the left, drop the hammer and sickle.

and drop the class warfare.

acadian driftwood.

You don’t have a clue: Not about me, not about history, not about unions.

I've never been a union member - pardon me, I was once for 4 months while I was a university student doing a summer job.

You'll never find any of those references, or language, as you put it, in anything I've written.

I could care less about your appreciation - you owe me nothing - I'm not indulging in any kind of class warfare. Such terms the right wing uses to demonize people they can’t impress with their compromised ideology. Such terms are an attempt to curry fear, something no one with the courage of his or her convictions needs to do.

I try to serve the truth. Something you seem to know or care about very little. Or at least so it seems judging by the difficulty you seem to have deciding how you’ll represent yourself.

Maestro is incapable of writing a simple declarative sentence, let along understanding complex issues. He tries to be funny and mostly fails at that as well.

How you vote, or even if you vote at all, is a matter of complete indifference to me.

The people I care about are people who use their heads for something other than self-interest.

I don't disagree that you have good intentions, it's the practical application of those intentions. the language you use is loaded, and it alienates people -kinda like the ndp. Don't presume you speak for the little guy, you don't.

Provincially, I agree with a lot of your views. I would cast a vote for proportional representation. But nationally, you're out to lunch.

probably because you haven't travelled very much.

and I don't mean two weeks in costa rica -that doesn't count. I'm talking about living abroad for at least a year. (I would include quebec as being 'abroad').

Acadian Driftwood:

Ditto..I don't disagree that G West has, in fact, a good heart and good intentions...and relatively sharp mind..."relatively" speaking.

.....ALSO: Usually when one is getting their ass kicked in debates they resort to same defence tactic as your Leftie teacher (which we all had one at least once) and in their desperation critique your so -called grammar , diction...etc. .....sorta like the rest of us smile, say "nice doggie" and have a bat behind your back...you get the picture.

However,back to the forensic analysis of Lefties, many of the TYEE posters rant on like Lenin and Marx et al and seem like they are stuck in some ideological black hole.

Many also seem to dwell and marinate in some nether world that exists between Communism and Socialism. To me at least communism is far more honest and up front. Socialism seems to want the best of both worlds..ie Capitalism and Communism...and not admit any of the worst , not realizng one can't have it's cake and eat it too.

Socialism has had its day, perhaps to stop the Uber- right Robber Barons that existed then and no one will deny that old- time socialism has been a vital cog in the progression of the fine tuning of modern democracy, providing a counter force and counter balance.

Example : Go to Nanaimo...NDP hotbed..... still those there fighting the old Robert Dunsmuir coal Baron days, though Nanaimo is sure booming along with the rest of BC in the MODERN age.

The Left- of -center has existed and always will exist, but it needs to re- group , but the NDP is not the answer, given it seems to stagnate and a bit deer- in- the- headlights numb. Is that the Right -of- centers fault???...of course not. They are part of the the broader democracy that provides the environment so the NDP can exist...free will etc. The NDP has no one else to blame for obsolesence , it was planned internally.

The funny thing is , they, the NDP got their asses kicked when Campbell got elected the first time and formed BC Gov't..ie only 2 seats. However, they, the NDP, are quieter and more disorganized after their comeback in the last election...what does that tell you ?

Federally...same thing ,...and people are getting wiser to this NDP sideshow. Just because the NDP underestimates the intelligence of the General Public, just like G West and other TYEE Lefties do, doesn't mean squat in the bigger picture and the inevitable NDP judgement day. Time to quit burping and changing the diapers of this immature party and its cling ons.

If the TYEE lefties can't get this, again it's not our problem.

acadian driftwood:
As I said, you don’t have a clue. About where I've lived (not travelled – travel is for tourists), how old I am or what I do.

It's entirely irrelevant to the realm of ideas and the debate that can happen here at its best.

I understand why you're uncomfortable with the way I put things but I could care less who I alienate. I'm not interested in making casual friends.

Hundreds of people read these threads and never comment. They do pay attention though; I can assure of that. As to how they judge the discourse here - well, try to imagine how a third party would look at the nature and character of the things you write.

Do you think they'd be very impressed? Inclined to agree with you? Persuaded by your logic?

My language is not loaded. It's direct and to the point, not cliché-ridden and generally un-ironic. I can recommend some reading if you’re interested.

And if, acadian driftwood, you want evidence of maestro's debating skills, just look at the long-winded emptiness of his post just prior to mine.

His kind of stuff isn't worth the powder. We just let it hang there and the observant reader can see for him or herself if it makes any logical sense - no further action required.

Even if many NDP voters switch to the Liberals in the next election, as might well be the case, the Left itself won't be dead. We'll simply lose our voice on the national stage.

Lefties like me and G will be relegated to the Tyee blogosphere and you guys on the Lib-Con right will no longer have to put up with a left-wing voice in parliament. I would expect the Liberals to thus not bother anymore with their left-wing rhetoric since they would already have all the Lefty votes they could ever get already wrapped up. Would allow them to concentrate on wooing Conservative voters. For me, no longer having to listen to Liberal propaganda trying to entice NDP voters into the fold would be almost worth Canadian politics becoming a clone of the US.

Even for many so-called NDPers that seems to be a worthwhile outcome in order to prevent the Conservatives from attaining a majority. (Why people care whether its the Libs or Cons in power I don't know, they just want to think Liberals won't do things like slash funding for housing I guess)

In my view too many people among both the NDP and Libs seem to think the NDP should be nothing more than a Liberal ally, always attacking the Conservatives and rejoicing in Liberal victories. Nothing could be further from the truth. Paul Martin, John Manley et al would be far more comfortable at a gathering of Conservatives.

The NDP has been fractured in the past (remember the Waffle?) and yet survived and I know I wouldn't shed any tears to lose the centre-Left to the Liberals. I'd like to see a more left-wing version of the NDP that severed the union connection once and for all anyway although to have a voice on the national stage it would require proportional representation. Something that could come only from the Conservatives, the Liberals will never bring in electoral reform.

However, there's still more left-wing NDPers than there are Greens and perhaps a dissolution of the NDP and a takeover of the Greens would be in order just to rebrand ourselves without the Buzz Hargrove's of the world demanding a say when union people don't vote NDP anyway.

Just a thought

As for the NDP being the voice of the "working man". Well, certainly most working people don't vote NDP. Yet the NDP is the only voice for those on the bottom of the ladder.

Sweatshops still exist today, even though we rarely see a robber-baron in a black stovepipe hat checking his pocket watch outside the building. However, the sweatshops that exist are never targeted by the Libs and Cons. Instead, they say that the people working there need to just quit and find a different job or go back to school. Its only the Left that says the conditions that allow the sweatshop must be torn down. So in that sense the NDP is still the only voice for a segment of the working population.

Its also the only voice for a large number of other groups that can be placed under the umbrella of "the poor". Neither the Libs nor the Cons court these people or publicly discuss the conditions of their lives unless its to score a point at the other's expense.

Even the Green party is not interested in that demographic. The Greens prefer to target the well-off under-30 crowd. For one thing, they vote and for another they have oodles of pocket money to donate to the Greens.

(With the rise of the environment as an issue on people's radar Green political fortunes should rise too. We'll see in the future how much the Green support can be siphoned off by Libs and Cons suddenly discovering the environment)

So that means that as the NDP loses its voice the poor will lose theirs. Anyone care to disagree?

don't disagree at all; in fact, you've summed it up quite well.

don't know what the stats are on poverty but I know there's a lot of 'em.

which brings us to what can we do with the ndp?

I've suggested a merger with the libs and a national daycare program. this would provide a genuine left wing alternative to the tories. Canadians ( and I am guessing here) would resist the idea of a merger because we'd look just like the usa -a two party system.

nonetheless, that is my suggestion. any takers?

Frank,

I'll add that I don't know what the solution is regarding poverty. Companies that feel they are being taxed too much will just leave the country now. In the old days they didn't have this option.

I can't agree to a merger with the Libs. For one thing, the result wouldn't be a left-wing party at all. So I wouldn't feel at home there. As a Liberal I'd have to agree with those who call poverty the result of laziness, who think the deficit is a more important issue than child poverty etc. I just can't go there and I doubt many other left-wing people could either.

The next election will see a de facto merger of the Liberals and the right-wing side of the NDP. In my opinion the result will be a clone of the US with two conservative parties and no left-wing voice. I understand you're a conservative and probably see a difference between you and the Liberals. Its just that from my point of view you both look the same.

What I'm saying is rather than see that de facto merger as a defeat we should just say good riddance and construct a new and truly left-wing party or take over the Greens. Either way, building a party on the pillars of economic justice, social justice and the environment.

you make excellent points and they're probably 100% true.

I'm a conservative only in that I support an elected senate. British Columbians are different than Albertans and Quebecers are different than Newfoundlanders and so on and so forth -point being we have different aspirations and identities. An elected senate addresses these structural problems. I hope one day poverty can be tackled at the provincial level.

Trying to get a feeling for this particular thread:
NDP/Liberal vote
Eh?
As long as it gets the "Whacky" bonehead Harper out I'd vote for George Bush. for cryin' out loud! What is someone like him doing purportadly running a country?

Whatever we face after he's done can not be worse (and I do not agree with the statagy of leaving him in place to hang himself)

Once this "festive" season is passed maybe the madness will pass with it

Re NDP...perhaps this discussion should look towards the down and dirty of

" WHAT IF THE NDP ACTUALLY FORMED A FEDERAL GOV'T " ???

Of course, we would get into the tried and true political formula...paying off past debts and maintaining current support.

What alliances with other Federal parties and what pet legacy projects would the NDP wish to implement prior to their likely short shelf -life as the Gov't?

Would the Libs and the Tories perhaps joint venture a vote of no confidence ?

In my view, asking and answering those sorts of more "extreme" questions adds to the NDP relevancy and NDP survival debate.

Re National daycare program (gee that spells N.D.P???):

(....BTW...Knowing this will get some TYEE Lefties knickers- in- a- knot, especially the TYEE rhetoric police).

Sorry, this is just a cheap political stunt to sequester more cheap votes and more Big Brother involvement.

I will translate this National Daycare idea as becoming a very generic centralized Federal program full of bureaucracy, politicization by the Gov't of the day , and the inevitable Unionization of the work force. Use the BCTF model of children as hostages with PR of " it's for the kids".

We sought out Private day care for our own children, and it worked out very well. If we create a national daycare system, it will force many private ones to close. We didn't cost the taxpayer anything, and it was OUR personal choice.

Of course the Canadian public will view it as " free " while the reality in the background is that taxes either increase or other programs get reduced funding in order to pay for this new Big Brother program.

Like one wise person once said, if something is "free", there is infinite demand, which is why Gov't often hedges with a true active follow -through on these sorts of programs. I see this national daycare as being one big politicized mess ,and we already have others to deal with without adding to the list.

The start up costs would be huge , as well as future ones, ...they, Gov't , can't even handle in cost efficiency and accountability one program that involves long metal pipes with triggers...

Give parents choice , tax breaks, vouchers etc, and not expose their children to ADDED years of exposure to agenda driven zealots and taxpayer- funded hostage -takers (ie another quasi- BCTF )which in my view a National Daycare program would in fact do.

This issue is typical of what ails us...and our political system...BS vote grabbing rhetoric and ideology = false hope... and keeps things in suspended animation.

Conclusion : Forget it.

What makes you think private daycare doesn't have a tax 'cost'? maestro. Do you not understand the tax system at all?

G West:

Rather than tap dancing ( again ) on thin ice, why don't you lay out exactly what you are implying re: " tax " cost more whilst on Terra Firma.

Glib one - liners kill valuable cyber trees.

Regardless, if this issue's discussion de-evolves into "The State" can do a better job or elbows out what is provided currently by the Private Sector..it'll end up as the same -old King Kanute type- of- debate.

Over 2 - U .

maestro:
Why do I always have to explain the nasty bits to you?

Anyone who uses daycare can deduct the costs of such daycare - adjusted according to certain limits. The details are here:
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t778/t778-06e.pdf

Since allowing you and anyone eligible to deduct the costs of daycare in determining their taxable income reduces the amount of tax you and others will pay - it also increasest the burden of taxes on everyone else. The system still needs to pay for all the services government provides and it leaves a bigger hole in the pocket book of those who don't have children.

Therefore, your private daycare (or public daycare for that matter) has a 'tax' cost to anyone without children even if you think you're paying the bills yourself.

The problem is not a problem for thinking people because they realize we live in a cooperative and interdependent society and that we will all, over time, need and access the 'services' of the state in one way or another.

Your facile pretence that only 'government sanctioned' services actually cost the tax system is not something that usually needs to be explained to people who are at least 12 years old.

A good lesson

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a good NDP-er, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father.

He responded by asking her how she was doing in school.

Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"

She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA . She is so popular on campus, college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."

Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently: "Welcome to the Conservative Party".

Latarnik
If you think the analogy of good grades and a progressive tax system is a valid one I can introduce you to an awful lot of clever and very hardworking students who'd very much like to demonstrate to you how the current tax system keeps them down while it rewards the sons and daughters of their wealthy fellow students who can't maintain a 2.5 GPA and are going to fall into high paying jobs and a relaxed lifestyle - after they finished their graduation grand tour of Europe or the Far East - anyway.

Such nonsense.

When the rich are prepared to give up their tax dodges and support a program where every dollar earned - no matter where or how - is a dollar available for tax I'll introduce you to a tax system that can be an awful lot flatter and an economic system that permits the kind of upward mobility this culture hasn't had since the early 70s.

In fact, quite the contrary - we're going backwards. The father just indoctrinated his daughter into the lie of the upper class. Something an inequitable tax system prevents her from ever entering. To say nothing of the universal benefits every Canadian shares because of progressive taxation.

Latarnik,

very good lesson.

maestro,

couldn't agree more. the country's too big and diverse for a national daycare program. If there's gonna be one, let the provinces run it. Haven't we learned anything from the gun registry? (billion dollar boondoggle)

Gwest,

I'll say again, so you don't think I'm a rigth wing nutjob: I'm open to a provincially-run daycare program if that is the wish of the people of BC. But a national daycare program forced down all canadians' throats from sea to sea to sea? C'mon...

Gwest,

your response to both latarnik and maestro was unconvincing. dig deeper, please.

ad
I could care less. I'm not trying to convince YOU of anything. You should look up some of the reports on the first 10 years operation of the Quebec daycare program.

It charges only $7/day (started out at $5) and has, even so, regenerated in tax revenues more than 50% of its cost to the government. Wasn't shoved down anyone's throat either - unlike Harper's facile stupidity, which is nothing but a pander to his base.

Latarnik's notions about cause and effect are so confused and conflicted by ancient values they have little or no relevance in the modern world. I'm all in favour of hardworking people being reasonably rewarded for their diligence, intelligence and perseverance. The tax system rewards most those people who do nothing and clip coupons for a living - they don't even need any brains, they can just hire people like me who'll show them how to do it...for a small fee.

Let's stick to realities and save the fairy tales for bedtime.

Acadian Driftwood:

FTR: G West continually ass-u-me-s OTHER people are ill - informed or don't know " THIS " of don't know " THAT ".

However, you and other TYEE posters do show good intuitive instincts when some TYEE parties post a comment that will lead to an expanded discussion , versus overwhelming the initial post with detail.

G West, in my own case, ass-u-me-s we are unfamiliar or "ignorant" of Tax laws or certain ones as they pertain to deductibles costs for such things as daycare. Suffice it to say, we are fully aware of them, ....I still maintain we didn't cost the system a nickle, the rest is NO one's business but our own.

G West seems to prefer jigging and trolling in intellectual bottom - feeding mode,without laying out the point...ie his "nasty bits "comment posted above.

He seems to want others to stoop to his own level ....and assume what he says ....and continue to get "master baited" with more jigging and trolling , so he can then take a word or phrase and twist it with his Wikipedia -type prostelytization attempts to convert us to Leftie cultism (while G West is also writing out tax -deductible receipts for Leftie cult-ism membership, which will piss off the NDP monopoly).

Go Figure.

In light of this,..I personally think G West wants to run for office, when the Federal LIEberals and NDP merge.

Latarnik:

My compliments, very good story re: the Prodigal "NDP-ish " daughter's epiphany.

There is nothing wrong with being exposed to the NDP/socialistic ideology, in one's youth, and while one is still within the education system, as it collectively prepares then for the REAL WORLD for the rest of their life.

However, when the REAL world hits these socialist wannabees, the heart of socialism is often bypassed by the mind as it matures ...an old saying about if not a socialist by a young age you have no heart...but if still a socialist after a certain age you have no brain...that saying still pisses off G West via a past TYEE post waaaay back.

In theory the- brain- can -be- dead -but- as -long- as -the- heart -is- pumping- the -organism -lives "theory" applies to socialism.

While I was at UBC, an anonymous Leftie TYEE columnist and an equally notorious NDP MLA were just big time shite - disturbers on campus, foaming radicals, and one continually tossed out by the Dean for his antics, but now a so-called respectable "Lawyer".

I find Socialists to be rather intolerant, lose most if not all debates and rely on ideological draconian models bereft of pragmatism...ie based on taking away MORE rights than they give in return in order to fulfill their manifest.

I guess the rest of us have to tolerate them Lefties within the " Democratic umbrella ", so WE aren't called hypocrites...yet perhaps should draft legislation to make them obtain a Leftie permit (if not ban them outright), as this TYEE topic and others shows them to be both a spent force/farce yet still maintaining highly negative potential.

Luckily most "old"/past socialists I know (ie when they were young), have grown out of it, and matured, contribute and don't suck, much like outgrowing the "party-on and pimples " stages.

The UNrepentant rest should be put out to pasture and hope they don't break a leg.

If you understood what a tax 'cost' was maestro, why did you have to ask me to explain it to you?

I take it, if you claim not to be costing the system a nickel, that you don't take advantage of the childcare deduction for expenses incurred. I assume that, when your kids are old enough to go to college that you won't avail yourself of the transferability of the tuition and education amounts deduction either.

I'm pleased you've decided to wean yourself off the public teat so comprehensively and I assume you don't take RRSP deductions for your pensiod plan either.

A tip of the hat to someone who doesn't want to be a burden on the state: Do you drive on the public highways or float above them on the way to work each morning?

G West:

Actually, (and congrats G West ...finally a bang -on guess as to what I was actually thinkin'..or was it your on staff primates at coffee break? ) , " the float above the public highway" is on the backburner if and when the NDP forms Gov't again.

Think strategically/cover all bases !!!NDP's cheques , when in Gov't , are as good as anyone elses'!!!!! It only tax dollars right....

I'll go in with charts and graphs to the NDP Gov't and show it's feasible "in theory"

" I only need a $ Billion or so , give or take a few hundred million dollars to continue my research... I am T-H-I-S" close!!!! ( First I will get " white -out" and cover up the old Fast Ferry presentation).

I'll promise Union jobs... kickbacks.....(err I mean...campaign contributions) .....affirmative action programs....(maybe even FREE DAYCARE!!!) and Jimmy P. will guarantee the NDP leader a job when it all blows up....but it stimulated the economy....though it will probably sell for .00001 cents on the dollar at auction.

We'll then help the NDP start and learn to run a peanut stand/daycare though....ready for next time...

I guess Stump was right. I thought there might actually be a brain cell still working in there.

Too bad.

Have a nice ignorant new year. Can't say I haven't tried.

Ah yes G West....Guru Stump...( but who cares).

I guess you waved the white flag again eh, with the " sighing condescending intellectual mode " ?

G West Dude..that's oooooold strategy .

Actually G West...a bit busy, but will discuss the Daycare issue further...if you are up to it.

Re Big Brother aka National Daycare.

Daycare via tax deductions is a better way than a so - called " free " National one.

Also, I had family members run a popular local daycare/pre-school for almost 30 years, which adds to the discussion.

A National Daycare system , in my view, will simply not work as well as local private ones . Daycares work best on a smaller niche' scale. Parents tend to do due -diligence and seek recommendations for the right ones. Many daycares have a specific focus, ie Montesorri, French Immersion, religious -based etc.

Many daycares exist in residential neighbourhoods, in homes and approved by Local Gov'ts. They also exist in churches and via other religious groups. They are spread throughout the community.

A National daycare program (NOT Provincial like you allude to in Quebec, that is a DIFFERENT discussion) will have a typical one -size- fits- all approach...run by another centralized bureaucracy, likely in good ol' Ottawa.

In typical Gov't fashion, it will have Taj Mahal standards and be up against local gov't zonings. They will be located in some expensive central location, likely difficult to access, versus the many more widely dispersed " Ma and Pa" owner-operator ones that exist in residential areas.

Of course, when Gov't gets involved, the Unionize-the-employees remora side -show jumps on board. The Gov't capitulates and then the next bandwagon of social engineering types ala the quasi BCTF-esque entourage follows, (if not leads?) . Then we'll see Nation -wide strikes when negotiations don't go well ie using the children as hostages with the usual "this is for the kids " BS propoganda.

Likely a huge % of the Federal Daycare funding will end up in the funding of a new and $$$ voracious Federal bureaucracy. Much less will trickle down to the original focus children...versus the Ma and Pa daycare that has far less overhead and more child -focussed.

Other groups besides Ma and Pa daycares such as churches etc. will resent Gov't program as competition, and many may close their doors.

No free lunch...National daycare funding will cost us all in extra taxes.. or other programs will be cut to pay for it. Daycare is best as a user - pay system.

The Public will see that its mostly special interest groups behind these inititatives, who, as usual, claim to speak for us...and then cling onto this new Gov't teat and further politicize it. The kids will have plenty of that BS when they enter the Public System starting in say kindergarten...they deserve an early amnesty from it in daycare,... PRIVATE Daycare, that is.

Hmmm I see not much has changed, Murry's articles are still babbling garbage. He shows that he will stoop to any level to defeat the CPC and wants everyone else to stoop also. As pointed out the NDP would be rather foolish to trust the Lib's after the last time and Dion is just more of the same from the "Natural Ruling Party".
I look forward to a slim majority CPC government, for 2 terms. A slim majority is good for any government, enough to get the job done, but not enough to get to comfortable. The NDP and the Libs have convinced me to volunteer to help the CPC next election.

Oh by the way, happy new year