more of your diatribe luke skywalker

luke why can`t you just say it,campbell failed, his cuts in 2002 and beyond have cost us far to heavy a price! Campbell has failed----health--seniors--children--middle class--transit riders--ferry riders--forestry towns and workers-He`s been a arrogant egotistic failure on all levels. Luke skywalker you can do your best to yak about the 70s or 80s or 90s or about what someone else did but know ones buying it,campbell has been in office for seven long(too long)years. Media spin doctor luke,say what you want no ones buying it.Campbell will ride off to maui in another year and bcers will wake from this 8 year nightmare and spend the next two decades paying for campbells crimes against society.

An Unbiased Source

Ahh, truly the most unbiased think tank there ever was.

It is even generational. Perhaps the homeless can be given jobs in think tanks funded but others. I am sure they would have very valuable input, since nobody ever asks their opinion on anything. Perhaps the replies said persons would give would not fit the agenda?

A nice statistic designed to horrify us. But what does it mean? Is this number outside normal death rates for a population over the time period?

We have already tossed piles of money at this problem and all the Kleins dynasty can tell us to do is toss more. Gee, tossing money at poverty has proven soooo successful in the last thirty years. But I guess when you make your comfortable think tanky living off of tossed money, you want it to continue.

What I don't see in these reports is an acknowledgment that the system of service delivery based on tossing money is a complete failure and only begets even more addiction. Nor do I ever see the Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives ever present a policy alternative that is anything but tossing money at a problem and buying themselves nice jobs in the public purse.

Seth, give me some new alternatives. The old ones don't work. Show some real leadership because socialists are the most conservative people in the world. Even when it is obvious their "alternatives" don't work, they keep flogging the idealogical dead dog.

What we need is real alternatives, not dogma. And I haven't see a single politician or socialist have the stomach to do that. Try asking the homeless and reporting their opinions on the Tyee rather than trotting out the party line from generational parasites like Seth Klein. I can imagine what the Kleins are doing about poverty. Having another fund raising dinner (for them, not the poor) and getting their suits dry cleaned.

Ideological lies

CP the only people throwing money away are the fools EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULTS who support policies of neglect when it comes to the problems of poverty, disease, and addiction. We bear the costs in one way or another, and forcing people to desperate measures takes a far more costly toll on society than a structured collective approach organized to prevent the problems from becoming serious in the first place.

Moreover your blithe admonishment that people simply get into a skilled profession is amazingly shortsighted, EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULTS Let's just put aside for the moment as to where someone poor will find the money to pay for that education in this day and age. Student loans, given our current costs of living certainly won't cover it. But to be blunt, without all that so-called "unskilled" labour out there, our economy, our city, would come to a griding halt far faster that if we had to suddenly go without every single one of the professional video game developers, or many other similar "skilled" professions.

EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULTS -- TYEE MODERATOR

Frank

Frank, I have plenty of education, but post secondary and real world.

city person

I have skills - mad skills

check out the pdf

I'm 44 in June -could not finish my undergrad degreee because of money

student loans - will that pay rent and food for me and my 2 cats?

bs society.

City Person

Those are causes but they are not the "main" ones. Perhaps those are the "main" causes of homelessness though. However, we have almost a million kids living in poverty for example. These are not the children of the mentally ill or people on drugs. Most poverty does not involve either of those things, it is incorrect to do so, and therefore in my opinion we should not write people off and ignore the problem.

Some yes. But most poor people are not the way you're painting them. You are apparently under the mistaken impression all poor people are drug addicts and that is colouring your attitude on this issue.

Stick: If you do not accept treatment, you will be admitted into a facility under section 15 of the mental health act to protect you and society as a whole.

Again, you're talking about a small percentage of the numbers. Most poor people are as "cleaned up" as I am and don't need themselves or their children assigned to a mental health facility.

I attacked you personally?

Quote:I'm 44 in June -could

.

I did my Phd when I was 47 while I was a single parent and had to children to feed. I borrowed a ton of money which is now repaid.

If I can support my family on student loans, then you can support your cats. Better yet, get rid of the cats.

It is what you make it. Go to a third world country for a while and you might appreciate what you have.

You can stew in anger of get some help. Help would be more effective.

Realisticman

I want to thank realisticman for actually posting his own opinion about something. I look forward in the future to hearing more about the evil Seth Klein and his plans for world domination through the CCPA.

MichaelT

You're a member of this society that wants to work at a job you can live on. You're not on drugs or dealing with mental health issues.

I'm sorry but we have no use for such people here. We need people happy to work for low wages and live in squalor. Please report to the nearest gov't office and ask for a Ms Ayn Rand for "attitude adjustment".

City Person

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED HERE...]

as someone who grew up in the inner city and lived and worked in Toronto Montreal and Vancouver I can assure you Frank has it correct[...AND HERE...].

hopw about a referral for work instead of your dime-store psych/morality [...AND HERE. MODERATOR.]?

Work Referrals

hopw [sic] about a referral for work instead of your dime-store psych/morality garbage?

Have a look here:

http://www.jobbank.gc.ca/Search_en.aspx?ProvId=10&Student=No

and here:

http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/jjj/

Get a resume ready, make copies, shave, wash your clothes and head out.

Or you can wait for a government hand out. Personally, I think my plan will have more immediate results.

MichaelT

And don't forget to tell your prospective employers you're anti-union, don't have kids or ageing parents, have no health issues, love doing unpaid overtime and are willing to work for less than those communist pigs that want $10 an hour.

THANKS, FRANK, FOR PROVING MY POINT

"Yes, poverty is nothing important except to ideologues. I don't know why anyone worries about it when we could instead be spending our valuable time discussing the Port Mann bridge. The importance of that issues makes poverty look pretty small indeed."

Without even realizing it, Frank has conflated poverty and welfare. That of course is not true. There are many more working poor than what there ever were on welfare. That's why I support raising the minimum wage, and going well beyond that to in-work benefits and employment tax credits. And it's why I also believe that the fashion driven urban left in Vancouver is betraying its pathetic, time-warp ignorance and laughable silly buggerism by opposing highly productive public works projects like PMH1 that will be boosting employment in manufacturing and transportation for literally hundreds of years into the future.

If Frank and the rest of the militant, hard left want to bellyache about too many low wage service jobs, fine, that's a good point. So why do they violently oppose projects that will keep the higher paying manufacturing and transport sectors afloat and growing? The answer is simple. For these left wing kooks, just as for the right wing nuts, ideology is the issue, not poverty, or jobs, or wages, or anything else that's real.

Handouts are better?

British Columbia led employment gains in March with an estimated increase of 15,000 (+0.6%), pushing the employment rate to a new record high of 64.0%. Employment gains were widespread across several industries. With higher participation, the province's unemployment rate edged up 0.2 percentage points to 4.3% in March. Over the last 12 months, employment in British Columbia was up 55,000 (+2.4%), with half of the gains in construction.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Labour/LFS/lfs-en.htm

CityPerson

And as StatsCan says :

Over the last 25 years, statistics Canada says BC's median income plunged 11 percent to 42-thousand 230 dollars a year.

Even more alarming, stats can analyst Eric Olson says there are more people living below the low income cut-off.

"14.9 percent in 1980 and 16.7 percent in 2005."

Which I believe is MichaelT's point.

Budd

Yes, god knows we don't have enough construction going on. If only we had more poverty would decrease. Wait a sec, we have more construction going on now than we did 10 yearsa ago yet poverty is up! Manufacturing wages are down. Please explain how that can happen when you're saying the opposite should have happened?

Great, I will don my fatigues and continue to do so ad infinitum then. I appreciate your loving support.

It is simple indeed, because it puts the treasury in the poor house, puts tolls on everything and still doesn't produce the results you claim it should have. Damn reality, I suggest we train all statisticians to only produce data we like from now on.

I think you should create the "Port Mann Bridge" party. Appeal to the apathetic centre with a bunch of slogans that sound good but have no validity. You'll be premier in a year.

Budd redux

By the way Budd, when foreign workers are brought in at low wages to work on those public construction projects I assume poverty here is supposed to decline because they buy their lunches from little trucks?

You are correct

Real wages have definitely declined. However, no matter what people might desire, there is very little government can do about it. My granny grew up on the prairie in a sod hut. She want to grade 5 but she was the most educated person I ever know. She read a lot. One of the earliest things I can recall was her saying,

"Learn something every day. Get as much education as you can. If you wait for somebody to give you something, you will have a very long wait."

There is not much future for people without skills in the post industrial era. Every day I deal with youngsters working on construction sites, making $20 an hour and thinking they are making good money. They are not. They should be in school getting some sort of skill.

every mistake was made

There needs to be thousands of social of social housing units built for the working poor and unemployable.

WE need to open up a couple of thousand corrections units for the criminals and drug addicted.

The drug addicts need to be de-toxed and given some work details to get them back into the flow.

minimum wage needs to be raised to at least 10 dollars, and no starter wage(6 dollars)

Once you have the drug addicted sober you can work with them, set them up with a shelter and a job if they screw up (possesion of heroin-crack-meth) is a criminal offence send them back to jail(de-tox)

These measures cost money but if the drug addicted are left loose on the streets they will rob and thieve from everyone,so in the long run we are far better off to these measures.

Remember gordon campbell closed over 500 corrections units in 2002,he also made welfare almost unatainable as well he cut every other social service, every mistake was made!

people living on the streets are for the most part unemployable until they get cleaned up, and if someone wants to work and rent a place but all they get paid is 8 to 10 an hour,theres no where to live with these rental prices -food prices-transit prices etc etc.

That brings us back to the social housing units, if people can work,pay some rent,buy some food,and have a little left over everyone needs a little walking around money, eventualy a sense of accomplishment and pride will emerge. So the bottom line is we need a big stick and an even bigger carrot. Seems staight forward to me.

World Vision is too left-wing for Budd, but...

Their study entitled "Living Below the Line" was based largely on the 2001 census numbers as well as their own research.

Clayton Rowe, with World Vision, said the study found Canada's poor was made up of new immigrants to the country, aboriginal peoples and that the largest group of most vulnerable children came from families headed by single mothers.

He also found 40 per cent of these poor children live in urban centres, such as Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Vancouver.

"How do you compare poverty in sub-Saharan Africa with poverty in Canada?" Rowe asked, adding that it is difficult to ignore the ones in front of us for the others across the ocean.

He said no matter where they live, children should have the opportunity to be healthy, educated and safe.

So when the economics of a household falls below a certain level, Canadian kids may not necessarily be starving but they go to bed hungry, Rowe said.

He gave the example of people earning the minimum wage in Ontario will not be able to make it out of poverty. He cited the example of a single mom with two children who barely have enough to pay the rent, let alone the child-care issues.

The latest Ontario budget just lifted the minimum wage to $8.75.

Ann Decter is the national coordinator of Campaign 2000, a cross-Canada public movement to build awareness and support for the resolution to end child poverty.

She said politicians made a grand statement to end child poverty, but they didn't talk about the steps needed to be taken in order to achieve that goal.

"Basically there is a complete failure of implementation," she said, adding that Campaign 2000 is trying to push the government to adhere to timetables and targets.

While the federal government has failed to do enough to end this problem, she said some provinces are trying.

Decter mentions Quebec's expansion of affordable childcare, increased child benefits and improved parental leave has resulted in a consistent decline in child poverty rates since 1997.

Decter said Newfoundland has started to bring in changes but it is too early to know if those measures have taken affect.

She says the rest of Canada will have to adopt what has worked in Quebec in order to reduce child poverty.

In fairness it should be mentioned that there are compromising pictures of Ann Decter standing behind Stalin at a military parade in Moscow circa 1948. So obviously Campaign 2000 is a communist front organization and what they say should not be taken any more seriously than anything Comrade Seth Klein says.

And its also fair to say that Michael Walker of the world-ignored Fraser Institute says that all those kids are heroin addicts.

So as we say in Canada, "Viva Che, eh!"

Be it resolved...

Be it resolved, that the only way for a person to get ahead in life is the wait for a government of some sort to do it for them.

I feel so relieved. How could I have been so naive? I have seen the light!

(and off to work now)

Frank...

And ya have to understand that the key year there is 2005, when the economy really started to take off.

As a background, BC has always had higher unemployment rates (way higher) than the national average. Through 1982 to 2004, unemployment was always 7% - 9%, double digits in the early to mid-'80's.

With a larger unemployed labour pool to choose from, that does not put upward pressure on wage rates.

BC Unemployment/Avg. Weekly Wage % Change

2000 - 7.1% / 1.7%
2001 - 7.7% / 1.4%
2002 - 8.5% / 3.1%
2003 - 8% / 2.3%
2004 - 7.2% / .4%
2005 - 5.9% / 2.6%
2006 - 4.8% / 3.1%
2007 - 4.2% / 3.%

http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/lss/empern/eet21.pdf

Obviously, there is a co-relation between lower unemployment rates and higher wages.

And there is also a difference between "full time employment", which most jobs are today v. "part-time" employment, which many jobs were yesteryear.

And that has a positive impact upon lower income households in terms of wage rates, including the unskilled.

And ya, Budd is correct, development of transportation infrastructure is a vital component of the economy.

Just ask the truckers and plumbers and delivery people et al, who incessantly wait, all day long, heading west bound on the PMB... how those wait times are affecting their pocket books in terms of time and fuel.

CP

"I did my Phd at 47 when I was a single parent and had to children to feed [sic]".

I think you meant "PhD" and "two".

Luke

Luke, that's a straw you're grabbing onto. You're wrong on two points. 1. the economy started taking off in 1999 and 2. the economy has been slowing since 2005. Look at the BC GDP figures

1998 1.3
1999 3.2
2000 4.6
2001 0.6
2002 3.6
2003 2.3
2004 3.7
2005 4.5
2006 3.3
2007 3.1

Your unemployment figures by themselves look good but perhaps the reason why unemployment is still declining as the economy slows is due to retirements and not new hires?

You're saying jobs are better now but the wages aren't reflecting that view.

That's not what his point was.

Are you saying that lower fuel costs would be good for the economy? Okay. How come we produce more oil than ever here in Canada yet our fuel costs are higher than ever? Are we simply using the tar-sand money to pay for bridges that we wouldn't need if we just charged ourselves less for our own fuel products? (And yes I am being facetious but the overall point is still there)

luke skywalker -- [EDITED.]

have you heard cknw news all day (top story) middle class wages stagnent for the last decade,bc is the worst offender.

upper class real money is up 20% after inflation.

middle class wages have fallen in bc.

lower class wages are down 20%

Twinning the port mann won`t solve traffic congestion! THE PROPOSED TOLL WILL TAKE 2000 dollars a year or more money from the stagnent middle class.

The chickens are coming home to roost for gor-doh --the province of bc is on a one year countdown to the end of the campbell regime.

Frank

It ain't World Vision, but;

Quebec day-care program hurting kids: economists

Quebec's publicly funded day-care system is hurting children, although the long-term benefits it brings may offset the costs, concludes a report on the widely applauded system.

"We uncover striking evidence that children are worse off in a variety of behavioural and health dimensions, ranging from aggression to motor-social skills and illness," say the three economists who wrote the report.

"Our analysis also suggests that the new child-care program led to more hostile, less consistent parenting, worse parental health and lower-quality parental relationships."

The report is by economics professors Michael Baker of the University of Toronto, Jonathan Gruber of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Kevin Milligan of the University of British Columbia.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/02/howe-daycare060202.html

Get 'em into school, drive 'em nuts.

true

actually I am anti-union.

Frank...

Frank, with all due respect, you are kidding right????? :)

We are both living in the same province?

GDP is, unto itself, not the only economic factor... consumer confidence, employment levels, etc. must also be taken into account.

The only other time that I can recall when all key BC economic indicators have been equal to 2005, 2006, and 2007 was 1980/81, 1987 - '90, and '92/'93.

Out in the real world, one can see for themselves. (Alright, there are the forestry layoffs in some areas, but that represents a small blip).

Latest Labour Force Survey (April 8, 2008):

http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Labour/LFS/lfs-en.htm

A good (hopefully non-partisan) overview of these economic indicators.

http://www.gov.bc.ca/keyinitiatives/economic_indicators.html

And of course the BC Central Credit Union with their best 5-year outlook since 1985.

http://www.cucbc.com/displayjob.php?sp=35&type=SB&jid=3

Brian Gough:

Then you are telling me that you've never taken the PM bridge, esp. westbound, at all hours of the day or on Saturdays and Sundays, for that matter.

Ya better tell those folk your views or even Surrey New Democrats. I don't think you'll get much agreement.

Luke

We are both living in the same province?

As BC Stats? By all means email them and tell them you think they're talking about a different province..

Poverty is up Luke and it happened when the economy was doing very well. One can only wonder what the next downturn will do to the numbers.

As for GDP, I didn't make up the measurement and nor would I claim its a "left-wing" stat. The numbers, and conclusions, are pretty clear.

A higher power

For what its worth, I was just talking to a JW and apparently a higher power will soon be sorting this all out for the BC Libs. So no worries.

realisticman

www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/02/02/h

Get 'em into school, drive 'em nuts.

* Other research suggests day-care kids do better in school.
* The results may reflect mother-child separation, so they can't be used to reach conclusions about the merits of family care versus institutional care.
* Children's stress levels may go up when they start school, so in Quebec, it's just happening earlier.

I'm all for parents and kids being together instead of parents working and kids in care. However, I live in a society that expects parents with small kids to do just that. If that's what we have to live with then I think that care should be free because the alternative is only wealthier people having kids. I realize that we should expect our economic system to warp our values but that seems pretty extreme.

CP all you've got are homolies and cliches

CP all the homolies and pull yourself up by your bootstrap cliches don't and won't change the numbers. Nor will promoting lies that the poverty stricken are merely intent on waiting for government to do something. They clearly don't. Many resort to crimes like mugging, property theft, drug dealing and prostitution to get by, because they have no choice if they wish to survive. That leads to increased violence and disease, which puts a huge strain and extra cost on our social infrastructure.

Where do we as a society want to spend the money? Do we want to spend it on creating a more egalitarian society where we help those in need and provide them with real opportunity to improve their lot, or do we want to drop them into a jungle of strife where their survival is a matter of individual initiative, while those gainfully employed spend tax money on security, emergency services, police, and prisons, to deal with epidemics of disease and crime that all result from the desperation of all that individual initiative in a dog eat dog world.

Put simply, there are government services and programs that yes do cost money, but cost far less then what we have to pay to try and deal with the harm caused by their absence. Is it just pure self-interested greed that motivates you? Are you a member of the upper crust who has seen their income increase by that lofty 20% over the last 20 odd years? Does the clear increase in poverty and the degradation to our society, and to this city in particular, bother you so little?

james burns

correctomundo

just more choke points

The second narrows gridlock
lionsgate gridlock
alex fraser bridge gridlock
hastings gridlock
lougheed gridlock
main street
broadway
I could go on but you get the point,one stall one overheater one crash one snowflake a little rain and the whole things stops, all you will do is create a 2billion dollar parking lot and new choke points

there`s thousands of examples of how you can`t build more roads to combat gridlock.The alex fraser is a perfect example I`m sure you have the traffic flow estimates pre alex fraser and post alex fraser.

You could put rapid bus on the port mann,all you need is to dedicate one lane for busses and watch, watch people flock to the busses when they see them zoom by them everyday.

Thats the only way your gonna get people out of their cars is to make them suffer,but that wouldn`t suit your freind kevin falcon (minister of browning)would it luke the monitor.

Thats why enviroment canada is very upset about the sfpr through the bog,and health canada states that gateway will cause more health problems!

Also with oil going to 200 dollars a barrel and beyond and your hero gor-doh blathering about greenhouse gas reduction --remember its about personal choice,we must deter car travel.

gor-doh only wants to fleece people on the other side of the bridge for the benefit of his corporate freinds,

toll the sea to sky highway and run a bus.
toll the lionsgate toll the second narrows but gordon(the gargler)campbell doesn`t want to toll his freinds in west van and whistler,even though there`s the sea bus-the blue bus,

Campbell is just a two faced liar and theif, he`s only done one thing right since he`s been in goverment--FIXED ELECTION DATES!!!!!

[EDITED.]

Unrealisticman, the C.D. Howe Institute "study" was written by economists studying the efficacy of childcare. Let me just repeat that for you. It was a study by ECONOMISTS. If you'd bother to do a little digging that doesn't simply support your particular ideology you'd find that the C.D. Howe report was chock full of problems, errors and misinformation... yeah, I mean why on earth would neo-liberal market economists want to spread misinformation on successful universal government run social programs?

Here are a few quotes from a response to the C.D. Howe "study", by the Human Early Learning Partnership and UBC (people who know something about early childhood development and whether a program like Quebec's is good for children):

To give you an idea of the shoddy nature of the C.D. Howe promoted "study".

Why on earth does anyone pay any attention to the purely ideological driven drivel shoveled out by C.D. Howe?

Here is a link to a PDF of the whole comment by HELP at UBC.
http://tinyurl.com/5jnnk3
I'd encourage others to take a look at their other publications on their website if you'd like to see some solid research on early child development.

http://www.earlylearning.ubc.ca

Now I do believe this issue was touched on at the Tyee before. [INFLAMMATORY COMMENT REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

James Burns

Unrealistic Ideological Drivel, you say. How would you define that James? This is how they describe themselves:

Founded in 1920, the National Bureau of Economic Research is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to promoting a greater understanding of how the economy works. The NBER is committed to undertaking and disseminating unbiased economic research among public policymakers, business professionals, and the academic community.

Over the years the Bureau's research agenda has encompassed a wide variety of issues that confront our society. The Bureau's early research focused on the aggregate economy, examining in detail the business cycle and long-term economic growth. Simon Kuznets' pioneering work on national income accounting, Wesley Mitchell's influential study of the business cycle, and Milton Friedman's research on the demand for money and the determinants of consumer spending were among the early studies done at the NBER.

THE NBER TODAY

The NBER is the nation's leading nonprofit economic research organization. Sixteen of the 31 American Nobel Prize winners in Economics and six of the past Chairmen of the President's Council of Economic Advisers have been researchers at the NBER. The more than 1,000 professors of economics and business now teaching at universities around the country who are NBER researchers are the leading scholars in their fields. These Bureau associates concentrate on four types of empirical research: developing new statistical measurements, estimating quantitative models of economic behavior, assessing the effects of public policies on the U.S. economy, and projecting the effects of alternative policy proposals.

realisticman

They don't seem to mention anything about their childcare credentials which was James' point. Probably an oversight.

Or we could ask World Vision about what our monetary policy should be,

A political future?

James Burns, you make some excellent points. These are certainly issues that need examination. You are very fortunate that you are able to express your views every four years in an election. That vote really does matter. Even better, with ideas so noble, perhaps you can run yourself. I would very carefully consider voting for you.

City Person, James Burns, and others...

...please turn down the personal swipes. If you've run out of facts and counter-facts, then the argument's done -- leave the space for others.

Thanks,

Geoff.

You kiddin' me?

It sure is quiet on the Tyee these days with fewer opportunities for the ideologically divided camps to take pot shots at each other. Good old Seth runs an article referencing a sample of 48 out of 107,000 to justify his sub headline that Liberal policies are costing us billions and the usual crowd starts tossing the same old rehashed claims at each other. I used to think that most of the posters here were too bright to fall for such nonsense, or does the Tyee think it’s April 1st instead of May 1st?

mea culpa

See how disinterested I am? I didn't credit Monte for writing the article.....

NoLeftNutter

Political polls often use a sample size of as few as 500 and as many as 1,000 BCers out of a population of 4 million plus, yet according to my old solar-powered calculator 500 people is 0.000125% of the population.

According to the same calculator, 48 is 0.000448% of the population in BC on welfare.

That makes good old Seth's poll about 3.5 times more accurate than Mustel or Ipsos-Reid.

Looks to me like Seth's messenger may have been shot but still seems to be quite healthy.

Numbers?

I’m willing to consider those numbers across a broad spectrum of participants in a more general context. Seth is doing exactly the opposite, focussing on a specific context with a limited range of participants…..still doesn’t work for me.

NoLeftNutter

What broad spectrum? 500 people are considered to be enough out of a population of 4 million plus.

Then of course there's the SFU study which the article said :

I realize the Liberals thought that by removing the safety net of welfare they would pocket that $7,320 but SFU says it didn't work out that way.

Then again it could just be a commie SFU plot to get the gov't to spend more money on giving homeless people an advanced education...

[EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULTS]

Good article. It has certainly provoked an intense discussion :) The admin must tearing his hair out!

Frank...

It's the sample size that counts... not the size of the population.

1,000 is also typical sample size for Canadian national polls (pop. ~34 million);

1,000 is also typical sample size for German national polls (pop. ~80 million);

[and that German sample size also includes some of 'em lederhosen wearin' Bavarians] :)

http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/dimap.htm

Luke

I know that, and I also know about the half-man Blue King's lederhosen (and guess what his favourite colour was for his army?).

My point is why is 0.000125% okay for political polls but 0.000448% isn't okay for a welfare results poll?

And besides, there's still the SFU study on top of that as well as the increasing poverty study from StatsCan and so on.

Seems to me we shouldn't be discussing the messenger here.

Frank...

Sorry that was not my intention, really! :)

keep your eye on the ball

Thats luke skywalker stategy, bait and switch,change the discussion, go back to the nineties or some other decade and blame everyone, it must be frustrating L S to have your game thoroughly dismantled by some very sharp people!

My hats off to (most) of you

I wonder if the gargler campbell is willing to do a pre-election debate. If offered I am sure he would balk.

Traitorous thoughts?

A few lines in one of Budd Campbell's posts above caught my eye :

"Without even realizing it, Frank has conflated poverty and welfare. That of course is not true. There are many more working poor than what there ever were on welfare. That's why I support raising the minimum wage, and going well beyond that to in-work benefits and employment tax credits."

Since I've never seen such sentiments expressed by a Righty before, and certainly not by any others here, I wonder why no-one took him up on it?

Quick question, Luke Skywalker

Do you not recall the definition of NEOLIBERAL that I posted here for you several days ago?

Furthermore, rabble.ca is about as low as you can go as a reputable source. It's even worse than Ipsos-Reid.

Desperation leads to desperate measures I guess.

In any case, if you actually knew anything about the record of the three NDP governments you've mentioned you wouldn't repeat such a nonsensical allegation.

However, I will post the definition of Neo-liberal for you once again if you like because I fear you're becoming hung up on semantics and i'd like to help you clear up what is obviously turning into a confusing problem for you.

In Saskatchewan, especially, where the value and health of the Provincial Crown corporations is essential to the state of the provincial economy I think you'll find the Neoliberals were called the 'Devine' party and many of them ended up in jail.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Oh Geeee West...

Desperation leads to desperate measures I guess.

In any case, if you actually knew anything about the record of the three NDP governments you've mentioned you wouldn't repeat such a nonsensical allegation.

An excerpt from a book (on rabble) authoured by this guy:

Stephen McBride
B.Sc. (Econ.) (London)
M.A., Ph.D. (McMaster University)

Simon Fraser University
Department of Political Science

http://www.sfu.ca/politics/faculty/full_time/mcgr.html

Perhaps I am ignorant

Perhaps I am ignorant, but the study that everyone quoting here makes pretty clear links between education and income.

Less than high school: $32,029.

High school: $37,403.

College: $42,937.

University below bachelor: $47,253.

Bachelor: $56,048.

Post Bachelor: $66,535.

There really are no guarantees in life but if I were a bettin' man, I'd wager getting my children a good education would be a good gamble.

And certainly better than waiting for a government to hand me something.

But if you want to wait, do so. We are all free to do what we want.

myth of everyone needing education

City Person has been saying that the working poor just need to get an education to raise their standards.

This is a false assumption. If everyone in BC got a doctorate (as CP suggests is possible because he did), then doctorates would be worth a dime a dozen, regardless of how much a person sacrificed to achieve one. There is only so much room for higher education, and there are only so many people who can stand jumping all of the hoops in university.

In the 60's, only about 50% of the people graduated from high school. Since then, the high school graduation rate slowly climbed until about the year 2000. It leveled off and now stands somewhere between 80 and 85%. Realistically, that is about all one can expect to graduate from high school when one looks at how many people have special needs. Remember special needs includes emotional/behavioural disabilities* brought on by one's environment.

Of that 80% who graduate from high school, there is only enough room for a certain number of people to get degrees in post secondary education. As the Campbell government cut funding to both, apprenticeship programs and to post secondary education, it has become much more expensive to go to school than when City Person did to get his undergrad degree. Realistically, about 10-15% of the population is what can be expected to complete university. University is geared for the monetarily and intellectually elite members of our society. It is a rare thing indeed for the son or daughter of a person from the lowest income/education brackets to make it through college - let alone university.

It is even harder to complete masters degrees and doctorates. I don't know for certain, but I don't believe 1 in 100 people have a doctorate. Further, just to get into many masters programmes, one needs to have earned an "A" or better in a suitable undergrad degree field as well as have worked in the discipline. That was the way it was for me; and, of the applicants who were able to meet the criteria, only 1 in 5 were selected for the programme to which I gained admission.

Not everyone can get a PhD, and if they could, we'd have PhDs waiting our tables and collecting our garbage. Those with only a high school education or a bachelors degree would be treated as lowly as H.S. drop-outs are today.

*Emotional/behavioural disabilities include victims of trauma. Not everyone deals with trauma well. Trauma comes in all forms from emotional or physical or sexual abuse to car wrecks and natural disaters. Sometimes people are not constructed in a way to even deal with the trauma that they witness others go through. They shut down.

The pull themselves up by their bootstraps philosophy is BS. People generally do the best they can in this world, and they do best when led by example. If one wants a just and caring society, then those with the means had better be caring and just.

Correction

A little correction. What I have been saying is, that in order to improve one's standard of living, a person needs a marketable skill and that data makes a clear link to skills and income. That could be a plumber, a chef or even a bus driver. All are needed and honourable vocations.

The days of unskilled labourers making high wages were short and are no longer with us.

As for people with disabilities, I am all for giving them extra resources

No one waits for government

No one waits for government CP, that's yet one more lie you trot out as an aspersion. Government changes when the people demand it. Government follows the lead of the people. Getting the public to demand change is in part about having them realize the correct information, which education, and experience brings. But our elites, particularly those in control of the media, have been promoting a false message that serves their interests.

Change, however, can't help but come as the standard of living for the majority of Canadians continues to deteriorate. You can spin all you want, but sooner or later simple reality will take a toll people can't ignore. Personally, I'd prefer things to change in a safe gradual manner, with people and our society realizing and investing in the sorts of social infrastructure that will create a balanced and just society that provides opportunity for everyone regardless of the income level they are born into.

CP for someone who is constantly extolling the value of education, you pay remarkably scant homage to the fact that government is the reason most people in Canada can become educated at all. It is precisely the kind of cooperative effort, led by government, because of public demands, that has led to services that are far greater than the sum of their parts. Those collectively organized traditions, that saw their greatest growth in the immediate post-WW2 period, have been considerably eroded over the last 28 years.

All your homilies, and spin won't change that reality. And if people like you pretend too much longer, the changes our society will face will be far more severe than feeling simple upset that a few fractions of a cent of your tax dollars go to help some drug addict. As past revolutions have shown, things can get remarkably bad for just about everyone, including the wealthiest. But as history has also shown, it's better to avert catastrophe while you have the chance.

SIG...

Hmmmm...I don't really agree with that premise.

In terms of university, college, and technical schools, all can be a several year undertaking prior to graduation and of course it does take some money to do so... even student loans. Always been like that.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/10/05/bc-wage.html

Very true

That is very true, James.

Given the number of teachers, doctors and engineers, an numerous other technicians a society needs, I see figure as a tad low. The degree rate in Canada is now 30% and it significantly higher for new Canadians, I may add.

It has always seemed to me that our society doesn't understand the value of education and what I am reading here reinforces my assumptions.

not everyone

Even if they all were certified in a trade, there is not work for everyone to be a plumber or electrician or a teacher. Further, the entry level math skills required for many trades programs like one finds at BCIT have now surpassed what maost needed to get into university 30 years ago. Most people graduating from high school have great computer skills, skills that would have landed them high paying jobs 30 years ago when City Person was graduating. Most of these people are willing to be quite productive in society, but there has to be an end to the competition mentality. The US has always had the competition mentality and look at where it has gotten those people - 10 trillion dollars in debt. As we (society) need more highly trained people, it is in our best interest to educate those people. Going through school is hard work on its own. Perhaps reward the educated a little less, but require them to pay much less to get educated. This will level the playing field a bit for the people who grew up in dire and/or unforgiving circumstances.

Apprenticeship programs are not for everyone. Society needs unskilled workers too. I don't think people get a job as a night clerk at a gas station because they think it would be swell to clean washrooms, count inventory and make an occasional sale to some drunken MLA and his floozy on a Saturday night. People like to have jobs that are rewarding. They like to be able to use their brains as best they can. Don't think that a factory worker or some other unskilled worker is a lazy person. It is hard to go to do the same repetitive tasks over and over again. Intelligent people with high paying jobs also get jobs/careers that are more emotionally and intellectually rewarding.

Some of the saddest people I have seen are those with tons of eduaction and experience (engineers) who were been cast aside when our capitalist system decided it is time to downsize. In their mid-fifties, there was no place for these people to go. Education is not always rewarded, be it a trade or be it university. The loggers, truckdrivers and fishermen who have been losing their livelihoods in BC are skilled people, and what are they to do with their skidders, and grapplers, trucks and fishing boats? These people know how to use their minds and their hands to make a living, but nobody wants them. Big Business decided it is time to move elsewhere - sorry you guys have reached middle-age and nobody wants you. Big business says, "We'll just take your, I mean our, billions and go somewhere else now.

Good points

Perhaps not. But data shows that people with skills do much better in life.

That is because the only constant thing in life is change. The same was said during the industrial revolution and the Luddites didn't stop it, either.

If any person does not wish to better their education, it is their choice. There will, however, be a cost for their lack of foresight.

NoLeftNutter

No one is saying that sample size should direct social policy, they're saying it should serve as a warning that what we're doing isn't working.

Luke

Luke, you are talking about the entire workforce, this includes pre-baby-boomers in the average. Your statistic is meaning less to the argument. Sure go send some 50+ people back to school to get a high school diploma, that will really help them in their last years.

You and City Person need to look at your hearts, your souls. You need to consider if you truly believe everyone is as capable as you by virtue of birth, ability, and happenstance; and then consider if everyone should be measured by what is fair for you. Further, you need to consider that the world's resources are finite, and do we want everyone to be overproductive and overconsumptive? If we don't want everyone to be overconsumptive, then we must consider spreading wealth about more equitably. It would not hurt the wealthiest to lose a large share of their income. They would live just fine. However, the wealthy have asked that the people who can least afford it to continually get by with less. It would not hurt the wealthy to be heavily taxed for gargantuan gold-plated-plumbing homes, second and third homes and yachts.

You folks must learn to ease up. You folks must learn to share. Sharing Is Good.

City Person

You can't make a good living without a marketable skill. It can be any skill. Trades are excellent and many employers will pay your tuition.

You have a tendency to want to lump people into groups and then create a bad stereotype to brush them all with. Have you noticed?

Anyway, I assume you didn't read my link about business wanting a free market except when it comes to labour? What you claim are bad decisions made by people is at odds with that article which states that people are making rational decisions based on the price signals out there.

Also, skilled people's wages also went down. Which should make you re-examine what you wrote since none of it is true. The people whose income increased were investors, not skilled workers.

Luke

You're claiming no one derives benefits from taxes. You can't lower taxes and reduce services and claim that even though our wages have declined so have our taxes so we're better off. Lots of non-income taxes have increased, as well as fees and such.

If wages go down 10% and taxes go down 10% you're not just as well off unless society gained nothing from those taxes. Which is not true.

Luke

StatsCan declared yesterday poverty in BC had increased over the 2000-2005 period. Not quite the same years as above and they didn't say "proportion" etc. How else would you explain the difference between what they said yesterday and what you believe?

Frank...

I think that it's a little more complex than that. Yes taxation provides for the common good.

Simply speaking, I'm from the school that creating a positive business environment, inclusive of a reasonable tax regime, provides for a more robust economy, lower unemployment, etc.

As I've re-iterated here many times, cumulative budget surpluses have been around ~13 billion over the last four years in BC. And that's after the 2001 and successive tax reductions. BTW, those were carried out wrongly timewise as well as in the amounts, but I digress.

Remember, that during the 1990's, BC was one of the higher taxed jurisdictions in Canada. If we had the same tax regime now, those ~$13 billion in surpluses would be wayyyyyyyy too high.

I also kinda think that since 2005, many of those government services cut in the 2001 - 2003 years have been re-instated, forgetting about all of the infratstructure being built.

Real income levels, adjusted for inflation, are the real figures one should be focusing on and real income levels are also dependent upon taxation levels.

But at least since 2005 and earlier, wages have been going up with the near record low unemployment levels. Hey, I'm also for higher wages, I'm in the same boat as everyone else. :)

Frank...

Not what I believe, but previous Stats Canada figures utilized for LICO thresholds.

http://www.shim.bc.ca/atlases/fbc/ss3/graphs/Income_Low_Large.jpg

http://www.shim.bc.ca/atlases/fbc/ss3/Income.html

Quote:Also, skilled people's

Perhaps they have. But people with skills have much higher wages. That is why getting a skill is so important.

As for labour not being part of a free market, well, a person is free to work for anyone who will hire them. As for "big business," the great majority of Canadians work for companies with fewer than 50 employees.

Luke

And yet services declined. Many of those services focused on low income people. Therefore I can see why a tax deduction at the same time as a wage reduction did in fact lead to greater poverty since money coming back to people through redistribution declined. Not sure why you disagree.

Not fully, as the report shows, poverty increased as taxes fell.

The report only had data up till 2005. And although employment has grown GDP growth has fallen. Also, in spite of employment growth in the past wages still declined and poverty still increased because those benefiting from the increase in the GDP were at the very top of the wealth ladder. So I wouldn't count on poverty declining.

City Person

They have higher, albeit declining, wages. To have an income that doesn't decline one should not work at all but instead invest in those that do. If all Canadians quit working and instead invested their money in the stock market I guess we'd all get rich.

And we're free to live on any planet we want. Freedom to do so doesn't mean it happens.

What?

Correct me if I am wrong, but that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.

But neither does the anti-education mentality that is so pervasive in a certain set here in BC. I cannot recall how often I have heard that a BA means "bugger all."

Luke

Your second link seems to support yesterdays report by my reading. The graph in the first link seems totally at odds with yesterdays report. Perhaps the graph is wrong since it wasn't based on as much evidence as yesterday's report based on census data?

According to the second link,

Also, inequality is growing it says.

And yet the Liberal response was to punish people on welfare?

City Person

Correct me if I am wrong, but that doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me.

Nor should it. But according to the report it seems to suggest that that would be the best course of action.

Putting our money where...

I just read through the lengthy debate above and it seems the difference is that what "City Person" is advocating as the answer(get yourself an education, try to get a marketable skill) is sound advice that we'd probably all give our own kids or any other young individual.

But you need to distinguish between individual and societal solutions. As others have pointed out, if everyone were a PhD, plumber or teacher, who would run the grocery check outs for us, wash our restaurant floors, care for folks in the senior's homes, drive our cabs and fix our lattes? If you ask the people doing these jobs, you will often find that they are students or immigrants waiting for someone to move over or retire so that they can take one of those limited well-paid jobs.

If we want a civil society, we must be prepared to treat the folks who perform all the tasks we require to run our society and economy with respect. Minimum wages that allow people who do an honest week's to live above the poverty line is the absolute minimum we owe.

Aand at the end of the day, how much will people really care if the rich are getting richer as long as we don't have 900,000 Canadian children growing up in poverty, through no fault of their own. Or when we make sure that people with disabilities and mental illness have a social safety net that allows them to live with dignity, while helping to identify and support their abilities so that they find ways to live fulfilling and productive lives.

But even these most basic things aren't happening. So instead of arguing about all the rest of it that may not be as crystal clear as these glaring failures, people should be digging in their own pockets and writing their MLAs to demand that we and everyone else be required to contribute a fair portion of our own successes to making sure that we start to meet these minimum needs.

Luke Skywalker: Quote:As

Luke Skywalker:

And I've reiterated many time that these "surpluses" are meaningless, simply the result of under-predicting revenue as well as expenses. You trot this old chestnut out every time, no matter how often you've been corrected. What is BC's debt now? What was BC's debt in 2001? Has it gone up or down?

proves my point CB

The great majority of those businesses are low-paying service sector/retail: restaurants, motels, gas stations, corner stores, coffee shops, franchise fast food and other outlets. These businesses don't pay well either.

Governments have been so big business-friendly that big business has been able to off-load much of their workforce to sub-contractors who they pay less and provide no EI benefits for. Although large timbre lots exist in the interior, the forests are generally cruised, felled, logged, and trucked by individual contractors. They are all working for the company that owns the timbre license, now they have to compete with each other for the contracts that should never have been tendered as contracts. The subcontractors are the ones who have been stuck with the machinery, and they have no place to sell it.

So there you have it, a bunch of guys working in a dangerous industry to support their families and BC, and nobody is looking after them. The big forest companies pulled in record profits for 6 years, didn't get taxed, sold whole logs for export and now we have most people working for themeselves and for 50 employee or less subcontractors in the forest industry. The big companies are taking the big money they made and skipping town; but not, of course, before they get the government to let them developer the Vancouver Island forests for houses and parking lots.

Its like I said (and you are really good at ignorring the main point, City Person), perhaps it is time we slowed down on the competition bit. Perhaps it is time we used the resources we have to take care of everyone - spread some of the economic joy. As one of the richest nations on the planet, we certainly have the resources to take care of our own people. Competition is about selfishness, and selfishness is bad. Sharing is good.

Jimmy...

Government surpluses, either cash-based or by GAAP, may not be important to some but provide indications to many.

Over the past 4 years, not 7 due to the wrongly timed lower taxation levels.

Been corrected? Huhhh? lol

Quote:advocating as the

Education is an answer, and a very good one, to changing market conditions. Times change and people have to change with them.

Any company in Canada who employs a person must collect EI from said person, and match that person's EI contribution 1.4X. That is the law and the rules as to what actually constitutes and employee vs a contractor are very strict. If the company pays the employee and decides his/her hours and place of work, the person is an employee and source deductions remitted to the Receiver General.

But what the people here who feel education is a waste of time advocate is best left to the ballot box. I suggest they vote for the person who best expresses their views.

City Person

No they don't. You're ignoring the way companies get around that law nowadays. A lot has happened in the world since 1970.

So I assume you'll be voting against the anti-education party? Which party would that be?

Have you noticed your's and WorkingMan's views and style of writing are almost indistinguishable?

How?

I am interested in knowing how they get around it.

EI

Any company in Canada who employs a person must collect EI from said person, and match that person's EI contribution 1.4X.

People who are self-employed individual subcontrators get no EI, and they get no allowance for it for being a subcontractor. Fallers are now generally individual subcontrators, many truckers are individual subcontractors. They must keep their own books and drive themselves to deeper and deeper exhaustion for fewer and fewer dollars. There are many individual and partnership self-employed enterprises on the go in the forest, trucking and construction industries. Those self-employed highly-skilled sub-contrators don't get EI benefits and they don't get increased wage amounts when competing to land the bid. Some of them make out alright, but most just burn-out over time. As their job site is continually moving, they always have added travel time eating up their lives.

no surplus for gor-doh

Correct we have a higher bc debt now than in 2001.
p3s have not been paid,those costs have not been put on the books as of yet. the reason, to prop up the budget. When gor-doh is gone and when these bills start coming in, OUCH---As another commentor said --get out the lube this is going to be painful.

Forest Industry

Well, it seems to me that the forest industry is one that is best avoided as a career then. I has seem to me, anyway, that is has been a sunset industry for quite a long time.

Just like weaving was in Scotland in 1900.

errata & a comment

The above quote by city person should have been listed as such in my posting above.

We must not forget the topic of the thread:

So not only is it morally wrong not to take care of the most needy in our society, it is fiscally stupid not to do so.

As I said Luke

I welcome respectful and sensible comments on things I post - I'm still waiting - all you seem able to do is mangle my name.

The suggesting that the Doer, Rae or Romanow governments were NeoLiberal is absurd - no matter who makes the claim....

I'll reiterate by posting, again, the main points of the Neo-liberal gospel and wait for you to show me how it fits any of those governments' records.

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

1. THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow the wealth didn't trickle down very much.

2. CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and tax benefits for business.

3. DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that could diminish profits, including protecting the environment and safety on the job.

4. PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed, privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.

5. ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care, education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if they fail, as "lazy."

Imagine, in BC

Billions and Billions of trees and City Person says:

What terrible stewards these Liberal politicians have been with our resources.
With proper management, there should be lots of fibre to be felled and money to be made for our citizens into perpetuity.

Oh Brian...

Taxpayer supported debt:
(the credit card debt, not including BC Hydro, ICBC, etc)

Fiscal Year ending March 31, 2001:
$33.9 billion

Fiscal Year ended March 31, 2002:
$35.9 billion

(as I stated earlier due to the ill-timed tax cuts)
http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/01-02/PA%202002%20Debt.pdf

Fiscal Year ended March 31, 2007:
$33.3 billion

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PublicAccounts.pdf

Simply put, during that time frame, (2001 - 2007) billions in tax cuts early on, and more later on... billions more paid down in taxpayer supported debt during the latter part of the time frame.

Other portion of surplus utilized as one time contributions for infrastructure.

Heck, if we kept the same tax regime from the 1990's, ceteris paribas, the debt would be in the $20 something billion range.

But I digress.

true debt

Perhaps no person living in BC including politicians and CEO should earn more than the median wage until there are no more homeless people in BC.

Ohhh Geee West....

A reputable SFU poli-sci prof, who specializes in political economy, comparative public policy, and Canadian politics, writes a book entitled:

"Paradigm Shift: Globalization and the Canadian State (2001; 2nd edition 2005"

Stephen McBride
B.Sc. (Econ.) (London)
M.A., Ph.D. (McMaster University)

Simon Fraser University
Department of Political Science

http://www.sfu.ca/politics/faculty/full_time/mcgr.html

An extract from that book is as follows:

Even when we elect social democratic or liberal parties into government, we get neoliberal governance.

Now if you disagree with his (and my) opinion, among others, of neo-liberalism, simply e-mail the poly-sci prof with your definition and correct him. Simple as that. :)

BTW, Rae is now, well, a full-fledged Liberal as well as former BC premier Ujjal Dosanjh. ;)

As I said

Luke Skywalker

Other than this short reply, I'm not going to answer anyone who hasn't the common decency to my name - Besides, I already responded to your reference above.
Stephen McBride notwithstanding, where precisely is the evidence that any of the three gentlemen in question engaged in the kind of Neo Liberal sell off of public enterprises –among other things - which would make them valid recipients of the title of Neo-liberal?

It’s quite obvious you can’t provide the information since it doesn’t exist.

As for Ujjal Dosanjh, what in the world does he have to with it?

Simply roll back up the thread and check again the main points of Neo liberal governance - I've now posted them twice and you haven't, apparently, done anything more than quote a passage from rabble.ca.

Why would I care to waste any further time on such a facile exercise as trying to educate you?

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

errata

should be 'to use' my name 'properly'.

Luke

Wouldn't that have been a better thing?

On the other hand, another 10 years of the present gov't and we could be looking at a 25% poverty rate in about 2 more censuses.

Oh Geeee West...

Alright, some simple snippets:

Bob Rae - ONDP:

- ONDP requests $2 billion in wage cuts within the civil service and decided to act unilaterally.

- "Rae Days": Forced twelve days of unpaid leave for all civil service workers;

- reopened the collective bargaining agreements of public sector unions;

- implemented a wage freeze for public servants;

- Failure to institute public auto insurance;

Romanow - SKNDP:

- instituted a program of hospital closures, program cuts, and privitization to eliminate the budget deficit;

- Romanow later quipped that he was a supporter of Tony Blair's Third Way concept;

Doer - MBNDP:

- Supports Iraq war;

- working towards lowest small business tax in Canada by 2010;

Well at least you have a sense of humour! Too funny.

Neo-Liberal

mcbridea@sfu.ca

We should email him and ask why he thinks Mike Harris and Bob Rae governed the same way when no one else in Ontario did.

I think his book will confuse those of us that call Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld Neo-Liberals. Apparently Romanow and Bush have the same ideology. How about that, I didn't know.

Frank..

Firstly, both you and Sharing Is Good have good intentions and I understand where you come.

Wouldn't that have been a better thing?

On the other hand, another 10 years of the present gov't and we could be looking at a 25% poverty rate in about 2 more censuses.

I'm not entirely in agreement with the 25% poverty rate. If that would occur the present gov't would be booted out.

Government must always balance all conflicting societal interests and demands. A higher tax regime isn't a good thing either for various reasons as I have described earlier.

Many New Democrats would also agree.

Luke

quote]- instituted a program of hospital closures, program cuts, and privitization to eliminate the budget deficit;

What privatization?

So if you reduce a deficit you're the same as everyone else that reduces a deficit?

I don't know Luke. He may have flirted with the idea but I wouldn't call him a "true-believer". For all we know he may have toyed with the idea publicly to appear more electable.

And Campbell failed to invade a small country during his two terms, so that should mean he's no longer a Neo-Liberal? :-)

Luke

No they wouldn't, they'd claim umpteen straight surpluses and besides, those 25% don't vote.

No New Democrat is in favour of taxes for the sake of taxes. But, New Democrats would agree that if there is an issue that needs to be addressed and taxes would pay for it, then taxes should happen.

Ho Hum

Without Prejudice

Some on the left want lower government debt, some on the left screamed when this government paid down the debt with the surplus. shouting for more social programmes.

Some quote SFU profs., while other decry Nobel Laureates when the message is not pink enough.

One says;

What the mathematical calculation for this? High comedy, as is often the case.

Some say Child Care and social progammes in Quebec are good; while at the same time they say tax breaks for business are all the present BC government does. Then today we read that the American investment bank powerhouse Morgan Stanley is opening up in Montreal and creating 500 jobs with a $20,000 Quebec government tax holiday for each job. Wow! That's what I call a business friendly tax cut.

http://tinyurl.com/5rpgrp

I always have a chuckle at the disrespectful red herrings tossed at posts on The Tyee.

Frank...

...instituted a program of hospital closures, program cuts, and privitization to eliminate the budget deficit;

What privatization?

It sold Sask Forest Products to MacMillan Blodell Corporation.

It removed the limits on foreign ownership for the privatized corporations imposed by Grant Devine's Tory government.

The NDP has carried out a piecemeal privatization of the Crown utility corporations, including an increase in contracting out.

Since 1982, the number of government employees has fallen from 12,000 to 9,000.

http://tinyurl.com/6s4wz5

What education are we

What education are we talking about, especially of the "marketable kind"?

I grew up during the great depression, and later in the postwar years in the refugee camps, saw what happened to people with "paper degrees".

In both cases they were worthless, helpless, incompetent and forced into the worst and dirtiest jobs for survival. People with manual/mental skills were the best off as they could always find to do something to solve the practical problems of poverty, war and economic collapse.

That was when I decided that no matter how much academic education I may one day receive, I will learn a trade. I was 28 by the time I could do it, then I learned more trades and never looked back. I have some academic papers, but don't even know where they are now. Certainly not on the wall.

When our children were growing up, the only thing I've asked them was to learn some trade before going into anything else, so they could acquire practical, logical thinking and manual skills and how to use their brains. They did and although neither of them is now working in their original trades, they're doing well, because the experience gave them mental and physical skills to adapt.

The most important education anybody can acquire is getting ready for the possibly greatest degree of self sufficiency and we have been working toward this all our lives.

Especially now, with the world sinking into a long predicted and inevitable depression, caused by the ruling, fraudulent market economic theory, and even planned by the power elite controlling the "markets", to set up a global fascist dictatorship through the control of food and survival supplies?

I wonder what all those millions of paper degree people are going to do when their world collapses, apart from forming gangs to steal rural people's animals and food supplies?

When Europe was terror bombed to smithereens during WW2. it was people with skills who rebuilt it with their bare hands , from the ruins, and almost non existent resources.

No society could achieve the same now, after 60 years and generations of miseducated incompetents. Even if they have worthless letters behind their names.

Ed Deak.

good intentions

Thanks for acknowledging that Frank and I have good intentions, Luke Skywalker. Now, don't you think it would be great if everyone in the province who earns over the median income for the last year or has a net worth over say, 1.5 million be asked to contribute a months worth of earnings or 1% of their net worth (whichever is greater until we have the homeless problem fixed.

I'll bet we could find nice warm beds for everyone inside of a month, and we would have lots of new construction on the way. Is it too much to ask, getting every one of the priveledged half of society to work together? Believe me, it would cost my wife and me a chunk of cash; we're both professionals. But, we'd have no trouble sucking it up for the good of society.

Baloney

Saskatchewan Crown Corporations

* Agricultural Credit Corporation of Saskatchewan (ACS)
* Crop Insurance Corporation - See Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation
* Crown Investments Corporation of Saskatchewan (CIC)
* Information Services Corporation of Saskatchewan (ISC)
* Investment Saskatchewan Inc.
* Liquor and Gaming Authority
* Municipal Financing Corporation of Saskatchewan (MFC)
* Saskatchewan Communications Network (SCN)
* Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation (SCIC)
* Saskatchewan Development Fund Corporation
* Saskatchewan Gaming Corporation
* Saskatchewan Government Growth Fund Management Corporation
* Saskatchewan Government Insurance (SGI)
* Saskatchewan Grain Car Corporation
* Saskatchewan Health Information Network (SHIN) - See Health Information Solutions Centre
* Saskatchewan Housing Corporation
* Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority
* Saskatchewan Municipal Board (SMB)
* Saskatchewan Opportunities Corporation (SOCO)
* Saskatchewan Property Management Corporation (SPMC) - See Ministries - Government Services
* Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC)
* Saskatchewan Transportation Company (STC)
* Saskatchewan Watershed Authority
* SaskEnergy Incorporated
* SaskPower
* SaskTel
* SaskWater
* SCN (Saskatchewan Communications Network)
* SCIC (Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation)
* SGI (Saskatchewan Government Insurance)
* SHIN (Saskatchewan Health Information Network) - See Health Information Solutions Centre
* SMB (Saskatchewan Municipal Board)
* SOCO (Saskatchewan Opportunities Corporation)
* SPMC (Saskatchewan Property Management Corporation) - See Ministries - Government Services
* SRC (Saskatchewan Research Council)
* STC (Saskatchewan Transportation Company)

Oh and Potash Corp...

In addition to its corporate headquarters in Saskatoon, the company has operations at Allan, Cory, Lanigan, Patience Lake and Rocanville. In total, it directly employs almost 1,500 people in the province.

PotashCorp also has a significant impact on the manufacturing and service sectors. In 2005, the company’s Saskatchewan production facilities purchased approximately $137 million in goods and services, excluding raw materials and energy, with 72 percent of those purchases from local suppliers. It is currently re-investing almost $500 million in Saskatchewan, increasing opportunities for people, business partners and communities to share in its success.

This also benefits the Government of Saskatchewan, as PotashCorp paid $249 million in royalties and taxes to the province in 2005.

campbells worried

hes attempting to pass electoral amendment act, The goal of this act is to limit third party advertizing to 150.000.00 -beginning 5 months before the next election.

the bctf spent 1.5 million advertising against campbell last election,with this new act they would be limited to 150.000.00 or 1/10

This has been attempted before but the courts ruled that it was an infringement on the frredom of speech.

The only thing I read into this is campbells worried, I guess gor-doh doesn`t have much faith in ipsos reid or mustel polls. Why else would the gargler be freaking out over third party advertisind?

Michael smyth had a column in the vancouver province on this bill (It blew me away to,somethings happening at canwest global lately ) I think they smell liberal blood in the water.

realisticman

You're talking about being disrespectful?

That really is funny - from someone who has taken to calling me 'pastor' - you have little or no sense of irony apparently.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Ohhh Geee West....

Is a private company and has recently become the most valued company in Canada on the TSX, by market capitalization, surpassing Encana Corp. of Calgary. Incredible.

http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=480610

BTW, what's up with the list of current SK crown corportions?

FWIW, Here are BC's in comparison:

British Columbia Assessment Authority
BC Games Society
BC Housing Management Commission
BC Hydro and Power Authority
BC Innovation Council
British Columbia Lottery Corporation
BC Pavillion Corporation
British Columbia Railway Company
British Columbia Securities Commission
BC Transit
BC Transmission Corporation
Columbia Basin Trust
Columbia Power Corporation
Community Living BC
First Peoples' Heritage, Language and Culture Council
Forestry Innovation Investment Ltd.
Fraser Region Interim Aboriginal Authority
Homeowner Protection Office
Industry Training Authority
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia
Knowledge Network
Legal Services Society
Liquor Distribution Branch
Oil and Gas Commission
Partnerships BC
Provincial Capital Commission
Royal BC Museum
Tourism British Columbia
Vancouver Convention Centre Expansion Project Ltd.
Vancouver Island Aboriginal Transition Authority

So what????

fiat lux

You know, Ed,

I grew up working from the earliest times I can remember, on the farm. After high school I became a machinist for a number of years and later moved on to become a carpenter/mason/builder/contractor. Along the way (and for fun), I have did some stints in the oil patch, commercial fishing and logging. Growing up on the farm made me a capable hand in any industry and the skills were fully transferable.

I now have 3 degrees. Though I am entitled to work in a professional capacity and derive income from them, none of those degrees has been as useful as the practical knowledge and skills I have gained through working as part of a team with real materials: earth, metal, wood, and living things. I think that my degrees are in a filing cabinet. I never attended a convocation.

Now in semi-retirement, I am joyfully returning to those skills to sustain my wife and me. We are building a homestead for my family that I hope will not be raided by hungry no-nothing city-folks who think that deserve what I have. I will, however, gladly share my food and provide a hay loft for hungry people as best I can if things fall to pieces. I may even be able to teach some of them some skills in my woodworking shop if they are willing to work. My homestead will be off the grid. I just need a couple of more years to put it together. I pray that a huge depression does not hit before then.

And still, I say, not everyone (even if they were capable) can be a plumber etc. and still live in the city. They do not have the need for everyone to be using those skills nor to have degrees. The city is a huge waste of human energy. Outside of appliances, utensils, and farm machinery, vehicles and tools, they produce very little of actual worth. If the depression does hit hard, I'll take a logger over a pencil pusher any day.

Did I say it wasn't?

And seriously, either call me G West or don't expect anything further from me.

One can't expect to have a serious discussion with someone who thinks he can define terms to suit himself.

Look again at the list of Saskatchewan Crowns by the way and remember that both Frank and I lived in Saskatchewan and we both know what Devine did to the place.

Furthermore, the whole issue is, in the context of this discussion thread, irrelevant.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Luke

Ya kinda stuck on my "what privatization" comment but didn't address anything else.

Romanow did pretty well. Not perfect, even from a left-wing perspective, but I know well what he took over from. Didn't Devine set the Cdn record for most MLA's in jail? (Colin Thatcher not for political reasons but he counts regardless)

realisticman

If what you mean is that Wile E. Coyote is the evil genius behind the CCPA and world domination I'm with you 100%.

Yo, Westie

Why would I wanna be disrespectful? If you take another gander at my post you might see that it's rifeness is distinctly ironic.

Interesting to note that in the latest Statscan figures (2000-2005) the median earnings of the lowest earners grew by 7.9%, whereas those in the highest group grew by 5.8%. The gap is actually closing.

Respectfully yours,
etc., etc.

simple math - realisticman

I don't know what the actual amounts were to start but:

7.9% X $500 = $39.50
5.8% X $50000 = $5800
58000 / 39.5 = 136.84

If the lowest earners had received $500 a month and the highest earners $50000, then the highest earners received an increase that is about 137 times that of the lowest earners.

A small percentage of a whole lot is a great deal more than a large percentage of a little bit.
Once a person already has wealth, then it is much easier to maintain stay wealthy, as even a small return on a large invesment is more than enough to live on.

You know the saying, Realisticman, "It takes money to make money." You couldn't possibly think your simple playing with numbers would fool a readership full of university graduates, now did you?

Sharing is Good

No Sharing, I wasn't trying to fool anyone. I was just quoting from the StasCan study, which also, incidentally, clearly states that the study was about individual earnings. When 'family' earnings and 'all' income is included we see that the lower income group is much better off than they used to be due to increases in government disbursements. These include Old Age Security pensions, Employment Insurance, child benefits and GST tax credits. In fact 52% of of every $100 received by families in the lowest group comes from government sources.

As you say;

and;

So, being as smart as you say you are, you know that, the more work one does or the more people risk in business and farming the more they might reap.

The more seeds you plant, if the soil and the weather is right, the richer you too will be and therefore more food you will have to share.

Luke

Luke Skywalker:

As I've repeatedly pointed out, they are not surpluses in any meaningful sense. They are a result of under-predicting revenue, as well as under-predicting expenses.

Do you really not understand?

Fiscal Year ending March 31, 2001:
$33.9 billion

Yikes! Very wrong!

In 2001 the taxpayer-supported debt was 24.619 billion $, and the total debt was 33.238 billion $.

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/00-01/PA%202001%20Debt.pdf

In 2007 the taxpayer-supported debt was 28.841 billion $, and the total debt was 36.738 billion $.

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PA_2007_ProvDebt.pdf

Both taxpayer-supported and total debt have risen since 2001. Of course these figure ignore a great deal, for example the effect of amortisation, as well as the debt from these projects:

http://www.partnershipsbc.ca/pdf/pbc-project-overview-24-jan-08.pdf

The debt from these projects is hidden in P3s. How much debt? I know the cost of a few of these projects:

Abbotsford Hospital - 355 million $

William Bennett Bridge - 170 million $

RAV Line - 2+ billion $

Golden Ears Bridge - 808 million $

And that's just the tip of the iceberg, in terms of hidden debt.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=be4c05c2-444b-4624-afbb-fb98ac8b799e

Luke Skywalker: Quote:Doer

Luke Skywalker:

- Supports Iraq war;

- working towards lowest small business tax in Canada by 2010;

The fist point has nothing whatsoever to do with neo-liberalism. The second doesn't necessarily indicate. Crack a dictionary if you are still unsure what "neo-liberalism" word means.

Jimmy... I Stand Corrected.

I erroneously looked at the "total debt" line as opposed to the "taxpayer-supported debt" line. My bad.

Firstly, anyone with a financial background will understand that public accounts are the final financial statements, for the relevant fiscal year, that are presented to the legislature.

Under-predicting revenues/expenses relate to budget projections at the beginning of the fiscal year.

You are the only person, that I've ever come across, that postulates the cumulative budget surpluses, amounting to around ~$13 billion, over the past 4 years are not meaningful. GAAP aside. :)

As for the correct taxpayer-supported debt figures, they are as follows:

Fiscal year ending 2001: $24.998 billion

Fiscal year ending 2002: $27.175 billion

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/01-02/PA%202002%20Debt.pdf

Fiscal year ending 2004: $29.982 billion:

Fiscal year ending 2007: $25.874 billion;

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PublicAccounts.pdf

BTW, you should check your tax-payer supported figures! :)

Luke

Luke Skywalker:

Wow. Thank you for that.

They are not meaningful because they are not surpluses. By the way, you should get to know more people interested in government finance.

28.841 billion $. Page 112, third row from the bottom:

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PA_2007_ProvDebt.pdf

I'd suggest Realisticman

That this aphorism [copied below] of yours, applied to the subject of this thread and making all the necessary and appropriate adjustments, is the absolute perfect refutation of the current government's policy and program relative to the poor, the working poor, the homeless, the disadvantaged and the disabled and much of the middle class. The fact of the matter is that this government's scattering of OUR 'seeds' has almost exclusively been wasted on the rocky ground of corporate hegemony and foreign pandering, tax cuts and deals for wealthy friends - not to mention games, circuses, misanthropy, the suborning of the justice system and outright lies. Whatever questions citizens may have had about the relevance and accuracy of the research done by other groups has been definitely refuted by the current release of data from the 2006 census. In every respect it underlines and reinforces the essence of what I, and others, have been writing here (and elsewhere) for the past two or three years.

Instead of looking after families and children, instead of caring for the elderly poor who are being abused in for-profit 'retirement' homes and care facilities, instead of properly funding public schools and universities, instead of investing in the future - this government has been selling it off. Monte Paulsen's excellent series of articles on the subject of the poor and the homeless have illustrated the facts quite clearly.

And, after all, as the author points out, the costs of continuing to do things the way the Campbell government is doing are much greater - and certainly less successful from a medical, security, tax and self-sufficiency point of view - (not to mention moral standpoint) than changing their approach.

We have more poverty, more homelessness, more illness and morbidity, higher costs for crime and police protection and an altogether less successful society in British Columbia than was the case 30 years ago.

Unfortunately, the statement isn't true of farming either.

The more seeds you plant, if the soil and the weather is right, the richer you too will be and therefore more food you will have to share

Now THAT, is ironic!

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

And, if you don't believe me....then

please read this:

-snip-

"In 1980, 20 per cent of pre-schoolers and 18.7 per cent of school-aged children lived in low-income families.

Twenty-five years later, those numbers barely improved to 19.3 per cent and 17 per cent respectively.

J.J. Stiles doesn't exactly fit the typical image of Canada's poor.

The single mother of two girls has a university degree, a diploma in radio and television arts and a certificate to teach English-as-a-second-language. She works in Toronto as an administrative assistant and makes just over $37,000 a year.

Although Statistic Canada's low-income cutoff – Canada's closest equivalent to a poverty line – for a Toronto family of three is $31,801, Stiles comes up against financial difficulties every month.

"Come on. If I'm above the poverty line – you've got to be kidding me, because I am living in poverty," she said.

"The poverty line? I think they need to reassess that."

After rent and groceries, Stiles sometimes finds herself at the end of the month washing clothes by hand and hanging them to dry in the bathtub. She can't go into her purse and find a spare loonie for the laundry, as she simply doesn't have one.

A few months back her daughter needed black pants and black shoes for a school concert. Stiles was unsure where she would get the money. Thankfully her mother offered to buy the new togs.

"I don't have money in my bank. I don't have RRSPs. I don't have any savings. I don't have any extra money to put away for my children, for their school," she said.

"I live paycheque to paycheque."

In 1989, the House of Commons unanimously passed a resolution to eliminate poverty among Canadian children by the year 2000.

Statistics Canada defines low-income families as those who spend at least one-fifth more of their income than the average family on basic necessities such as food, shelter and clothing.

Stiles was lured to Toronto more than a year ago with hopes of a better paying job than the one she had in North Bay, Ont. – where her yearly income was $14,000.

Not only did the move mean a higher income, but she believed it would mean a brighter future for her girls.

Things didn't pan out the way she had envisioned.
-snip-
Economics professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax, said the median income has been flat in Canada since the early 1980s and that at the very bottom of the income distribution the country has "seen really significant cuts to social assistance and social programs."

"Income gains in Canada have been very narrowly concentrated at the top of the distribution," said Osberg. "Most people haven't seen much change in their real income."

-snip-

Source:
http://www.thestar.com/Canada/Census/article/420338

There is a lot more information there as well.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

wonderful posts, G West

I truly like your last couple of posts. And if you don't mind, I'll repost this single sentence that sums up many of my thoughts.

Silly me, I had forgotten that certain posters, here, are uninterested in the truth. Certain posters look for ways to distort facts and ignor truth if it may seem as though it will confuse the reader and help their cause.

In my work with the public, one thing is absolutely clear to me: the average BC citizen is not better off after having had Campbell and his clan in power for the last 7 years. The average BC citizen has to work longer and harder for less. The average BC citizen also owns less because the government has sold off every possible asset that it can that could both make money and save money for the taxpayer.

Under this government, those on the bottom are ground down into the soil like insects under fascist boots.

Sharing....We bought our

Sharing....We bought our homestead in 1975 and moved here permanently in 79, after 24 years in Vancouver, 22 in business. Haven't been back there for 20 years, my wife for 28.

When we moved here and started to build a large house, not for luxury, but as a self contained survival system, we found that we won't get paid for our business we sold. It was a capitalist fraud. The guy set up a company on paper and bought the products of our company at bankruptcy prices and resold them at full price, paying us .20cents on the dollar. The company is still there.

We lived, with our son, in 3 small cabins 16'x8', 12'x8' and 8'x8', without electricity, running water, phone, refrigeration etc. for 8 1/2 years, building custom furniture with a small generator, doing every odd job we could find to scrape up a few bucks. Moved into our house on Christmas Day 1987.

We developed a large organic market garden in a harsh climate and virtually no topsoil , still raise cattle and chickens for eggs for sale, built the house, installed the wiring, plumbing, made all the furniture, painted the pictures on the walls and carved the sculptures, etc. all by ourselves.

In the meantime I also studied economics to break up the present fraudulent system, copyrighted the only scientifically correct definition of economic efficiency in 1991, unbreakable on many international economic and World Bank forums, used in PhD dissertations, but not in practice in the present fraudulent system.

Now we have all the comforts and live very well off on our yearly income of about $24,000., because we can grow a lot of our best, organic foods, have the workshops to build anything from wood, weld, fabricate from metal, and with this computer can correspond with scientists and other thinking people, all over the world in seconds.

Now tell it to miseducated, brainwashed economists that self sufficiency to the greatest degree, from the individual to the community and national levels, is the only way to go and they break down in convulsions.

In their little minds, "specialization" and export/imports are the "most efficient" as they raise the phoney GDP, even when thousands sleep and starve in the streets.

But they make the middlemen, corporate mafia rich, so they can buy pimp politicians and governments and everything is OK.

Ed Deak, Big Lake

Great Idea, Ed!

Great idea, Ed! The homeless, the disadvantaged and the infirm can homestead! Imagine how their lives will improve when they live off the fat of the land, not them there greedy capitalists!

Even better, Ed, is you can take a few dozen to your place and teach them how to do it! I will rent a bus and drive them up to you. Please send directions.

Luke

Well, actually you know two because jimmy and I have always shared a liking for looking at the totals and not the spin. We even share links.

I hate to move away from the article and the StatsCan report but here's the thing, if I buy a house for let's say $200,000 and my payments are around $1200 a month its possible for me to claim that for any particular year I only owe $14,4000 (12 * 1,200). My debt may still be the principal remaining but as long as I have more than the $14,400 I'm free to claim I'm running a surplus even though I just increased the debt. Okay, fine, we all understand that.

But now we have all these new types of debts hidden in P3's and run-of-river projects and so on. Whereby we set guaranteed payments for decades, or we guarantee the project itself, or we relinquish control of a resource or a revenue stream for decades or even in perpetuity and so on. If government is involved, these things should count upfront instead of showing up only in a Vancouver Sun column by a finance writer who understands what they just did. But it seems to me that only the positive side of these things is being talked about. The gov't still shows up for the ceremonial turning of the soil, still declare "they're" doing it and tell us to thank them yet we don't see any debt increase. The gov't acts like these things are free.

And people don't seem to ask how a gov't can say it has no money to increase welfare rates or alleviate homelessness while at the same time claiming they're spending 5 trillion (exaggerated number Budd) on "public" projects and running a "surplus".

It may all be legal in the accounting world Luke but its still not kosher.

City Person

Since you are a big proponent of everyone educating themselves and not asking for help I suggest finding the directions yourself. It should be relatively easy to understand there is probably only the one Ed Deak in Big Lake and that you can use google map to get directions. You don't have to thank me for my assistance, consider it a "hand up" so in future you can do it yourself.

However, although I'm sure Ed would be happy to do teach people how to live off the land I'm also sure he might want to be paid for his time and materials.

Perhaps Ed and the government can work out a P3 project together where Ed gets paid and we in the Lower Mainland get rid of poverty for "free".

Great Idea, Frank

Not a bad idea. I am all for positive thinking and action. The status quo doesn't seem to be working. I am sure you would be willing to lend a hand, too, Frank, right?

City Person

As long as I'm properly compensated I'm right there for you and Mr Campbell CP.

Ahhh

As long as somebody else pays. Typical.

City Person

In other words you and Mr Campbell are all for "volunteers" whether it be the Olympics or whatever but when someone asks to be paid for their work you're all aghast that anyone should ask to be paid for their work. Typical. No wonder you hate unions.

City.... with your ideas on

City.... with your ideas on life I wouldn't give you the time of day, as I'm sure you'd turn it into some warped ideological lecture, sanctifying thievery.

Anybody who can not understand the simple, long standing physical law that "wealth can not be created, only taken" is hopelessly out of touch with real life. Or is paid to be.

In any case, I'm 81, WW2 vet, lived in 5 countries, have 3 citizenships, apart from my Cambridge years, have trained apprentices, taught nightschool and still work 7 days a week. The last time we had a holiday was 3 days of camping at Osoyoos in 1968, so we deserve our peace and quiet.

As I mentioned, something long forgotten by economists and politicians, the textbook definition of economics is "The science for the management and distribution of scarce resources".

Not "wealth creation" with fraud.

Which means that it is their bloody job to figure out the ways of "distribution", and of the governments to put them into practice. That's what they're employed and paid for.

If they want our advice and experience, backed up by a circle of scientists from around the world, we'd be happy to talk to somebody with brains not distorted by ideology, or religion based miseducation.

Ed Deak.

City Person

Oh, I forgot, when it came to using media monitors Campbell WAS willing to pay.

And for some reason he believes his own time is worth $186,000 plus expenses every year. Part of which I have to pay.

Don't worry CP, now that I've taught you how to find Ed Deak in Big Lake with google maps there's no telling how soon you'll be able to take care of yourself.

Sharing

You say certain posters are interested in the truth, yet you ignore the facts.

Resident prof. Garth re-quotes The Star article which is more like a Reagan tale of one anecdote, including some UNICEF references. Check UNICEF's stats, if you don't accept Stats Can's and see that Child Poverty improvements are noted as a reduction in Canada of child poverty;

Life expectancy in Canada at birth is 80! Only matched by Japan.

Looking at the child poverty map we see that Canada isn't really on it.

http://www.unicef.org/sowc05/english/map2.html

A small percentage of a whole lot is a great deal more than a large percentage of a little bit.

So?

Earnings have gone up, for all. The rate compared with the rest of the world should be slight if we really want to help the unfortunate and less well off. Buying products from overseas is better than simply throwing them aid. We do both. The more we buy from the poorer countries the more we help them and the more we help them the less we will have for ourselves. Shouldn't we encourage this type of foreign aid?

When looking at the terrible statistics on child poverty and life expectancy in much of the world, the idea that the situation for any Canadians is poor is preposterous and at any meeting of UNICEF you'd be laughed out of the door in embarrassment.

I'm not surprised that leftie ideologues jumped at the chance to haul out the usual epithets at the local government they love to hate and neither am I surprised that they ran for help to that bastion of leftie ranting, The Toronto Star. They love Toronto - sometimes. Here's another Toronto comment you may wish to contemplate; be warned, not for the myopic and those that like to hop on the bandwagon of those that were truly victimized with silly clichés like the above "fascist boots", this one includes some facts.

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=490334

Relative

Canadians, the ones born here, really have no idea how well off they are relative to the vast majority of the people living on this planet. We have one of the best standards of living in the world and I for one am very thankful for that.

realisticman

And I'm not surprised you wasted no time in trying to counter that poverty is rapidly decreasing and the third world is getting rich off of foreign trade. In fact, you believe the poor in the world have never been better off.

Well, you don't like StatsCan or BC Stats. And by the way, the story was in the Vancouver Sun and on the CKNW website. You might want to let Diance Francis know.

Frank

If this could work and Ed is willing then I'm ready to chip in too. CP will rent the bus, I could donate a few tents and some good boots.

Maybe Ed's operation can become a registered charity, then he could at least give you a tax receipt for your bit; OK? Come on Frank, roll-up your sleeves. I'm sure Ed wouldn't mind if you were to be the collective agreement organizer. Would you accept payments in turnips?

realisticman

Jacob,

You didn't read the article did you? Earnings are not up according to StatsCan.

The facts being that if two parent families now make a greater combined income than 28 years ago where there was more single income families because the 2nd person could stay home with the kids, then we're really better off? That's a reach even for Ms Francis.

realisticman

Actually I love turnips. Love all the orange veggies. Yams, carrots...

Correction....Typo error,

Correction....Typo error, I've lived in 4 countries with 3 citizenships, my wife in 5 with 4.

We didn't create, or cause the poverty, just expected a major economic breakdown on account of the fraudulent theories forced on Earth by neoclassical economists some 40 years ago.

So we got out while we could.

Take you busful of street people to origins of the causes, the economics department of SFU and ask for Professor Emeritus Herb Grubel. He know everything, so let him fix it.

Come to think of it, you could and should take them to any university in Canada and around the world and show the professors the results of the criminal crap they're teaching.

Now I have to do some useful work instead of wasting my time on people whose mental capacities are limited to slogans like "lefties" and "marketplace".

Ed Deak.

Diance Francis' ideology

If we got rid of public education and instead gave kids the "freedom" to work from the time they were 5 years old, family incomes would rise.

Its because of the socialism prevalent in our society that we instead mollycoddle those lazy little tykes in things like kindergarten.

Instead of finger painting or listening to stories they could be raising the national wealth by selling matches and clams and cleaning cramped spaces like chimneys.

That we have so many poor is obviously the fault of left-wing do-gooders who wrap themselves in the public education flag at every opportunity.

truth

I work with the public. I have seen the numbers of poor people growing on a continual basis since the liberals came into power. I have watched as services for the poor, the infirm, the mentally ill & mentally handicapped, and the elderly have eroded. I have watched many good people who have worked in the ministries that serve children and families burnout or harden while trying to provide services with fewer and fewer resources while under this goverment's rule.

Truly, Campbell Inc. is not a government that has the best interests of all British Columbians at heart. Campbell Inc. is in it for themselves and their wealthy big business friends.

Supporters of Campbell and the Liberals can spout reports and misuse stats all they want, but I know that the average British Columbian is worse off; and I know that the poor are far worse off under Campbell. It seems that every town now has its own East Hastings street. Every town has homeless people.

Stats quoting increases in employment are just smoke and mirrors. Of course, unemployment was set to go down: baby-boomers have begun retiring thereby leaving working spaces available for a relatively small cohort of young people entering the job market. The new jobs have not been in manufaturing or primary industries. They have been in the service sector. Most generally, the service sector does not create products that are manufactured and marketed in foreign lands. These Starbucks and WallMart jobs have come at the expense of closing locally developed businesses. I see it all the time: the boarded up shops, the going out of business sales, the down-cast eyes of people having a tough time of it.

Further, money earned from working in a coffee shop does not compare with value-added forest sector jobs. This government decided to allow forest companies to rape and high-grade our forests; and the Liberals let these companies ship raw logs rather than keep the money here. Like George W. Bush, Gordon Campbell has had the MSM on his side. Both Bush and Campbell were poor businessmen; one was a terrible governor of Texas, the other a lousy mayor of Vancouver; whatever made the public think they could do better another wrung up on their respective ladders?

We have been fools for allowing these people in power.

Frank

Yes, I did read the article - and I read others. Not just the ones you read, here, from The Star, The Sun and CKNW. Others too. I also read the Stats Can survey and I read answered questions relating to the survey. You didn't, did you?

Here's one:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=485578

You missed the point - I always willing to explain more slowly

The anecdote quoted from the Star, I thought quite clearly, (and especially the material I cut and pasted) was making the rather logical point that someone with an income of $37G per annum was (although technically not within the 'definition' of poverty used by the authorities) was in fact very poor and not at all doing well. I’m sorry the subtlety of that point appears to have been lost on a certain coterie of readers who seem, willy-nilly, to be more concerned with inverting reality and looking at its nether regions for inspiration.

I purposely chose such an example to refute the usual and quite nonsensical claim that we are doing better (in the face of the noxious and widely available evidence to the contrary) because under some measures there might be a percent or two fewer poor folks in certain parts of the country today by someone's facile definition. There certainly aren’t in British Columbia and the general countrywide knowledge that at least 900,000 children are being raised in poverty in a land as wealthy as Canada ought to give anyone pause. Especially when the officially designed and purposely obtuse circumstances include the fact that the top 5 – 10 percent of the population are making countlessly-more dollars than they either earn, need or ought to have been invited and permitted to steal.

Both statistics and anecdote, not to mention Ban Ki-moon, illustrate that the poor and the hungry are doing worse under the evil goad of globalization:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102462.html

Canada, despite a series of promises stretching back to the time that Lester Pearson was Prime Minister, has REDUCED, not increased its commitments to international aid.

Is is any wonder that these characters have also set themselves well upon the way of creating the same kinds of nightmarish inequality here in Canada.

I also chose the Star story to counter (although it really shouldn't be necessary) the affectation of certain commenters here who still ascribe to a university education
the keys of wealth and success.

At a time when the main growth in employment in this country has been in that highly educated category 'retail clerk' I think it is definitely an idea that needs to be disabused. [Stats Can: THE DAILY, Tuesday March 4 2008]

Additionally, the concept smacks of elitism, as Sharing so recently and accurately pointed out.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Note to Frank

Hey Frank,

It is already a reality that 5 yr-olds can work in BC. The 12-15 year olds can work with their ever-lovin' parents consent. The relaxation of the child labour laws age restrictions came courtesy of the Campbell government. Sounds like just what City Person wants. Send the little buggers out to work at low-paying service sector jobs so they can save money to get the schooling they don't get while they are working. Also noteworthy is the reduction in spending for post secondary institutions under Campbell, thereby making schooling more expensive and less attainable so the poor little Dickens gets to work all the harder. Gee ain't it great! Nice little circle, eh.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/child-labour/childlabour-canada.html

realisticman

Jacob, apparently your links show that the National Post is having a fit over the report. Suddenly they seem to be claiming stats are meaningless. Yet I'm pretty sure they like those CD Howe and Fraser Institute "reports" they give front page headlines to.

Anyway, I read both NP links you provided for me, both are trying to dodge the issue by declaring "family" income has increased marginally (due to more 2 income households) even though housing costs make a mockery of that.

If its the banner you want to wave while ignoring the StatsCan numbers I won't stand in your way. For I too believe ignorance is bliss.

truth-2

I work with the public. I have seen the numbers of well-off people growing on a continual basis since the liberals came into power. I have watched as services for the poor, the infirm, the mentally ill & mentally handicapped, and the elderly have increased. I have seen the tangible results of the huge increase in health-care spending both here in the Lower Mainland and in norther regions, specifically the Prince George Regional Hospital. A friend who's doing very well as an educator is presently on vacation in Europe, enjoying his good fortune. Another who recently found work in health-care is also on vacation - enjoying life in BC. Another is on vacation in the US between one job and a new one in the cultural field. I've seen manufacturers and service providers hiring as many people as they can, and bringing people in Europe as new immigrants to do skilled work. I've also met people who have turned down work (millions of dollars value) because there are just not enough employees, at any cost, to do the work. I've seen companied enhancing their benefits in the hope of retaining employees, since poaching is endemic. I know of another who is purchasing the second half of his East Vancouver duplex since his manufacturing business is doing well and his since his wife is on maternity leave from her financial services job, they would like more space. I have worked with those involved in the massive redevelopment of the Woodwards project where educational, cultural, social and market housing is attempting to realise Jim Green's vision.

Since the Liberals put the province back on track life in BC has only become better and those of us working with the public in services, health care, education, infrastructure and the cultural and financial industries are happier and far more positive in our outlook.

National Post loves government assistance

By the way, was I the only one that thought it delicious that the National Post was upset that government assistance wasn't part of what StatsCan called "income"? The same assistance they've been railing against since their origin, the same assistance they want people hired to perform means-testing on, the same assistance they declare is too onerous for poor Canada.

Geez, you can't buy comedy that good anymore.

Jacob

That's great, and the fact we're poorer shouldn't depress you. I'm glad the Prozac has kicked in.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f3bc45da-1a34-4836-829d-967c2cceb1a6&k=65123

Jimmy...

Fiscal year ending 2001: $24.998 billion

Fiscal year ending 2007: $25.874 billion;

Those are the figures from public accounts. I've even double-checked 'em.

Ahhhhh... but there are!

Dominion Bond Rating Service:

This marks the first time British Columbia has ever held an AA (high) rating from DBRS. This places B.C. second in DBRS’s provincial rankings next to Alberta which, along with the Government of Canada, is rated AAA.

.

http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2007FIN0018-000576.htm

Moody's:

Currently, only the Province of Alberta and the Government of Canada hold Aaa ratings among Canada’s senior governments. British Columbia has not held an Aaa rating from Moody’s since July 1983.

http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2006FIN0203-001201.htm

Standard & Poors:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5243/is_200705/ai_n19740679

With world record commodity

With world record commodity prices and the wholesale sell-off and giveaway of BC resources during the last 7 years, the subheading of the article should never leave the minds of the taxpayer, most of whom have seen their incomes drop:

The media monitors must be having to work overtime this week - there's just too much truth out there to be able to ignor it.

Hmmmmmm...

Frank:

SIG:

Oh come on guys, we're going not back to this nonsense again, are we?? :)

paid media monitors

Paid media monitors are nonsense. They are a taxpayer expenditure against democracy. As long as media monitors exist, every Gordon Campbell cheerleader at the Tyee is suspect.

Frank...

Romanow did pretty well. Not perfect, even from a left-wing perspective

Romanow was respected across the Canadian political landscape. Again, in governance the SK Romanow New Democrats were neo-liberal. I would be if he led the BC NDP, (similar to Doer) they would be rather popular.

It pledged that the NDP government would create a "competitive tax regime" [with Alberta], reduce government red tape, train the workforce, and build required infrastructure and research facilities.

Emphasis was to be put on creating "a regulatory and taxation environment in which it is easier for business to operate."

The new NDP policy ruled out regaining control over the privatized Crown corporations in the natural resource sector or creating new ones to aid economic development.

At best the NDP would create "innovative public-private partnerships." Soon after this meeting the Romanow government established an industry-government committee to revise oil and other royalty rates.

They were not raised back to previous levels, as promised
in the 1991 election, but lowered below those set by the Tory government of Grant Devine. Other tax breaks for business followed.

http://tinyurl.com/5o2apr

Luke

Not sure what you mean Luke. SiG and I didn't invent the idea.

There was an article in the Tyee about it, plus here's Tielmann's take.

http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2007/04/premier-gordon-campbell-alleged-to-know.html

Luke

No chance, even the Liberal supporters on this website have always hated Romanow. Remember his health care report? The right-wingers here wrote it off because it came from Romanow.

Believe me, BC Libs would never vote for Romanow because he's an NDPer.

Romanow

Carole James loves business. Yet business and right-wingers don't like her.

To the Board of Trade :

"I will establish a permanent economic advisory council made up of business, labour and communities to act as a forum for new proposals and new ideas, to build consensus and understanding around fundamental questions of economic and social policy," James said. "No politics — just bright minds and good ideas."

With a mission to end "polarized politics," James’s focus is on "building bridges, not burning them." Her vision includes bringing in a one-year fully funded tuition freeze, doubling apprenticeships, reducing K-12 class sizes, opening 1,000 new long-term care beds and stopping privatization in health care.

"Economic prosperity, social inclusion and a caring and compassionate society can — must — go hand-in-hand. In an era of incredible social and economic change, of intense competition, open borders and mobile capital, we must nurture the potential of every citizen, to realize the potential of community, of our shared home and province," James concluded.

http://www.boardoftrade.com/vbot_speech.asp?pageID=174&speechID=758&offset=&speechfind=ndp

Romanow

Yet although James tries business snubs her

In a recent speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade, revealing views that came out in her platform a day later, James stressed that "business is not the enemy" and pledged to include business leaders in policy discussions if she is elected. She also promised to balance the budget without reintroducing the corporate tax or increasing other taxes.
NDP Leader Carole James met business leaders at BOT lunch.

"I think those promises were very sincere," said Lampert, after listening to James' speech at the board of trade luncheon at the Renaissance Hotel. "However, we heard the same promises in 1991 from (NDPer) Michael Harcourt when he ran, and when he ran government, he couldn't deliver. Michael Harcourt was an experienced politician - more experienced than Carole James."

Business leaders also question how James can finance her proposed 6,000 new long-term care beds by 2009 as well as 1,500 more teachers - and still balance the budget.

"Where is she going to get the money to meet those spending pledges?" asked Lampert.

Frank...

There was an article in the Tyee about it, plus here's Tielmann's take.

http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2007/04/prem

You've made your point. Reminds me of the Socred "Dirty Tricks" affair of the early 1980's.

But the NDP do win elections and a likeable, moderate/neo-liberal Doer/Romanow would be very competitive against an unlikeable Campbell.

Forget about what right-wing Liberals say.

It's the 20% of the middle-of-the road swing electorate, who don't care too much about party labels, that decides who forms gov't.

Romanow

You already have what you want in Carole James but you don't like her. Still, I bet if she was in another province you might even quote her speeches to business and say we need that type of NDPer here in BC and claim she'd win.

Then Carole James said she wanted to cut ties with labour and unions. Since the Gordon Campbell Mafia hates unions and does all it can to break them, it said: “Right on, Carole!”

Then Carole James told the B.C. population repeatedly that an NDP government couldn’t undo the bad things the Gordon Campbell Mafia has done. “Yes,” said the Gordon Campbell Mafia, “we, too, believe we are God.”

Then Carole James gave a speech to the Board of Trade. Instead of telling them to get ready to help the poor, to do new innovative things in B.C., to lose the tax love-in with government, Carole James tried to woo them, and failed.

The CanWest headlines the next day said, in effect, “the audience that heard Carole James told her to get lost.”

Instead of calling on the great NDP CCF past in B.C., Carol James tried to hide from it, ashamed of it.

Luke

I said it on another thread and I'll say it again. James is already a pro-business, sidle up to the Board of Trade, wink at Jerry Lampert type of NDPer.

Liberal supporters don't like her even though she has turned off many on the Left. Even I supported her approach when she first came in right here on these threads. But over the years I have come to believe that Jerry Lampert and Phil Hochstein would be happier with her in gov't than I would.

But in the meantime I've found it eye-opening to see how the right-wing and the media have treated a rightish NDP leader.

Frank...

Perhaps it more to do with content with the current administration, rather than looking for something new.

Obviously, James reaching out to business is not going to gain their vote but rather sends signals, through the media, to the 20% swing section of the electorate.

Frankly, I don't like James any more than Campbell and the BC NDP does not act like it's a gov't in waiting.

Two things today will change gov't:

1. Public fed up with gov't (1972, 1991);

2. Opposition has likeable, moderate leader with party that appears ready to form gov't;

Luke

We win non-fluke elections in other provinces, not here (nor in Ontario). BC's population is more right-wing.

Frank...

Two things about a leader:

1. Respect;

2. Likeability;

Both James and Campbell just don't have it with me as well as others.

Luke

I think James is likeable but there are things you didn't mention.

3. That people tend to vote the same way as their parents and that inertia is a lot to overcome. Its why there's not that many swing voters.

4. Swing voters tend to make their minds up based on the opinions expressed in their favourite media and a politician will have to be very special to overcome constant bad press.

Frank...

Well my grandpa thought Dave Barrett was the best thing since sliced bread. ;)

But seriously, the last Canadian bastion of that concept, until recently, was in Atlantic Canada (Liberal or Conservative).

Even there that's changed... in Nova Scotia the NDP leads provincially coming from nowhere in the mid-1990's.

Bad press relates to bad leadership, ie Campbell/James. Come on, both get bad press.

OTOH, Doer was until recently, the most popular premier in Canada (that roll overtaken by Williams in Nfld. with personal approval ratings in the 80% - 90% range.)

Manitoba has the same so-called Canwest/Global media as out here yet Doer got elected for a third term! (and no fluke). It appears that the NDP is now becoming Manitoba's "natural governing party".

January/08 Manitoba political standings:

NDP: 49%
PC: 34%
Lib: 14%

http://erg.environics.net/media_room/default.asp?aID=664

Virtually a mirror image of BC's political standing except with the Libs in lead. Why?

'Cause Doer is both popular and the NDP has taken over the centre of the political spectrum with his neo-liberal governance.

In BC, the Libs have usurped the centre of the political spectrum since 2005, irrespective of Campbell's unpopularity.

If he was replaced by Carole Taylor (likely BC's most popular politician), you would see further growth in the provincial Liberal numbers. Seriously.

Life on earth: just another sunset industry

So many "industries" in nature to harness.... and wreck havoc upon...and so little time.

You could always try "a career" in sunsets....go ahead, give it a whirl, "industrialize" sunsets. Why not? Gotta be a way. It's a free market after all. If we can so easily move on after ravaging forests, surely there's a way to extinguish sunsets and make a buck at the same time....all without a delicious second thought...must make a free market heart sing.

Anyway, sunset industries are booming big time here on planet earth of late ( or should that be the late planet earth?) Soon "the river industry", "the ocean industry", "the wild salmon industry", "the fresh air industry"... will all become Sunset Industries Inc. Gotta be THE industry to invest in.

A little dodo bird told me so.

Luke

Good for Doer, he overcame what he had to.

Again, I think it says more about the population of Manitoba. They're just more inclined to vote NDP.

By the way, if Gary Doer is a neo-liberal, what's Paul Wolfowitz?

Since 2005? The right-wing have got more votes than the left-wing in every election since WW2. I don't think they "usurped" anything. BC is just a right-wing province a la Alberta.

Luke

You don't think the political environment you grow up in matters anymore? I disagree, Libs and Cons still rule us federally as they have for 140 years. Same parties, back and forth. Each has a large enough base that allows it to weather bad times politically and come bouncing back in when the winds change and swing voters sign on.

Same story in the USA.

Which is why we never get change.

Luke

I agree. The Socred/Libs are so entrenched they will even win the election with a leader people don't like. Of course their numbers would be even better if people actually liked the Liberal leader.

Interesting

Interesting statement Frank. According to a Mustel Poll taken on November 27, 2007 Carole James had an approval rating of a stunning 36% while arch demon Gordon Campbell had 47%.

http://www.mustelgroup.com/pdf/20071126.pdf

A later poll, taken in March by Ispos, gives Campbell similar lead:

Somebody must be doing something right in the BC Liberal Party because if this continues, the NDP will be flummoxed again.

Remember, forming the government means getting the most seats.

Frank...

Hmmm... not really... the BC NDP received better vote totals than the MB NDP from '88 to '95 and relatively similar vote totals prior to that.

Only from '99 to date has the Doer NDP done better.

Why? Once in power, going from 40% to near 50% is a huge leap, and remaining in power for three terms, requires moderate, neo-liberal governance. And with Doer, MB got that.

Doer's likeability also factored into those recent totals.

MB Elections/NDP vote:

'69 - 38%
'73 - 42%
'77 - 39%
'81 - 47%
'86 - 42%
'88 - 24%
'90 - 29%
'95 - 33%
'99 - 45%
'03 - 49%
'07 - 48%

Neo-conservative, different thing or political animal. ;)

Gary Doer

e.

Gary Doer has proven himself a very astute politician, as well as a very able one. Moreover, he knows how to get elected which is kind of necessary if your party wants to put its agenda into action.

Gary Doer

e.

Gary Doer has proven himself a very astute politician, as well as a very able one. Moreover, he knows how to get elected which is kind of necessary if your party wants to put its agenda into action.

City Person

I think you meant to direct your comment to Luke, he's the one that thinks the NDP can win. If you read what I said you'd see I'm arguing that they have no chance.

The NDP can win, Frank

Frank, the BC NDP can win. All they really need to do is look at the example of their sister organisations in Manitoba and Saskatchewan for some guidance. This means they have to align policies to win voters and govern for a wider section of the electorate, real or perceived.

Luke

Not true. The NDP in Manitoba was getting high numbers at the same time there were 3 major parties in Manitoba. The NDP gets high numbers in a 2 party system. Big difference. Look at Ed Shreyer's victory for the NDP in the late 60's. Not a popular vote fluke, he actually came out on top in a 3 party race. And then won again a few years later. Manitoba is not BC.

Again, you're kind of ignoring what's happened in provincial politics there since. Note the collapse of the third party.

Requires? You can't conceive of a gov't winning successive majorities otherwise?

How about how Bill Bennett and Vander Zalm governed 16 years, straight majorities, were they middle of the road?

Grant Devine won two. Gordon Campbell has won 2 so far... Mike Harris won 2.

Yes, he was voted one of the sexiest men in Canada by Chatelaine...

Neo-conservative, different thing or political animal. ;)

Google Paul Wolfowitz Neo-Liberal and see what you come up with.

Also, not sure what you think about Wikipedia but here's the definition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

City Person

James has already moved so far to the Right I think Vander Zalm and Rafe Mair thinks she's too right wing.

Popularity did not follow after the NDP picked a leader that talks to the Board of Trade and tells them what they want to hear. A leader that has disassociated herself from previous NDP positions.

You yourself said something I could have said myself in response to Luke :

BCers simply like "arch-demons". I couldn't have found a better poll to back me up myself. I bet not a single non-NDPer was part of the 36% that approved of James.

NDPers in BC, Alberta, Ontario and the Maritimes have been trying to recreate the success of the Sask and Manitoba NDP for decades. The problem is not the NDP in all those other provinces, its simply that the ground is more fertile in Sask and Manitoba.

Do I have to post it again?

The definition of NEOLIBERAL, that is.

Could we actually start discussing the Campbell Government's failures and mistakes instead of pretending that any NDP government has been a neo con government? Because, after all, neo con and neo liberal ARE EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

I can understand why folks like Campbell wouldn't want to accept what a lie his government has been.

What I can't understand is why anyone who ISN'T a paid media monitor would bother trying to defend the indefensible.

As for working with the public, I work with them too and the public I work with is the same one Sharing is Good is talking about.

I do know people like Luke Skywalker and Realisticman - but I can't for the life of me understand them.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Now I understand

Because other people may not share the same views as you have.

I worked as a waiter in an old fashioned beer hall when I was doing my undergrad degree. It turned me off of alcohol for the rest of my life. I haven't touched a drop since then.

But that experience does not mean that all people who drink cannot handle it. It is just something that does not work for me.

Makes no difference which

Makes no difference which party gets elected, when they all get their orders from the same economists, brainwashed with the same criminal theories, and the corporate mafia, offering directorships. Not only in Canada, but all over the world.

This is why and how little Tom d'Aquino has been our unofficial PM, and the string puller of puppet governments for over 20 years.

All rulers and governments of history had priesthoods advising them, interpreting "divine orders". Now we have the pseudo priesthood of economists doing the same.

Nothing is new under the Sun and this is why history always repeats itself and always for the same reasons.

Ed Deak.

Now I have seen the light

Ed, I really don't know why you are not the Premier of Everything. Imagine how people could think you are a geriatric survivalist crack pot. How misguided!

City...... There's an old

City......

There's an old proverb that fits you: "The owl calling the sparrow a big head!"

Your all curing ideological expertise is fascinating. Must have had some "economic" training to achieve such perfection?

Ed Deak.

Westie's back

Garth West

I'm sure they are, otherwise you give 'em a good talking to. Since more than half the population is generally content with the present administration, it begs the question; which circles do you guys travel in?

realisticman

That's why I don't understand why you come here. You always just have this 5 year old "the polls love us so we're perfect" line.

Must knock them dead at school.

More insults - fewer facts

Is it really necessary for me to point out the fact that:
a) This government received less than 46% of the votes cast in the last provincial election, and that;
b) The total of votes cast for the Green Party and the NDP party amounted to 50.70% of the votes cast, at the same time that;
c) The percentage of eligible voters who actually cast ballots was 57.80%.

YOU DO THE MATH. How many people in the province actually 'like' this government and are willing to continue to make excuses for their abysmal performance at anything except pandering to their friends, selling off the furniture and lying?

As for telling people how to think, not me, my friend - I just want them to learn to think for themselves and stop listening to the white noise from the so-called media in this province.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Keep at it, Ed

You are quite correct, Ed, a major flaw in our system is the corruption of our educational system, inasmuch as it is now directed primarily towards producing technologists in management and physical science. Who argues today that a University Education should not be about the making of money ?

IMO, the proper sequence should see the teaching of the humanities first, which sharpens the mind and the comprehension of ethical values, since theoretically we create a society to serve its citizens first, in the best manner possible.

Although the creation of wealth is a welcome and necessary activity for a society, it is only ONE of a number of goals a well-functioning society should strive for, and so it should be a secondary goal of education, not a primary one.

Our failure to recognise that has resulted in the corrupted political process we see today.

Imagine that you are one of those who get elected primarily because of your charisma quotient, and there are many such, and have only one area of expertise, such as selling cars or as a lawyer specialising in real estate contracts.

Let us then suppose that you are quite bright - and there are many of these too, and the Premier sees potential for you as a quick study in his Cabinet.

So now you're Minister of ForestS, even though you've never set a foot in the woods. But such experience is not at all necessary.

First of all, you've got set Party policies to guide you in both Forestry and Economics, and then to advise you,a phalanx of "experts" in Forestry, from Deputy Minister on down, all of whom have learned all about debenures, road-building, yarding systems and replanting at UBC.

Since these people all have academic or industrial experience which weeds out those crazies who might seriously challenge the reigning forest management orthodoxies, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to be a Minister of Forests - or Anything. You need only enough brains not to offend your industrial patrons, and to be a good "communicator" of memorised cant.

The next step is easy. Just shut down "Participatory Democracy" of all kinds, and you've got it made.

Seig Heil, Herr Campbell !!

GWest

You asked the question;

Just as the BC Liberals lead the NDP by 12 points in decided voter support, Gordon Campbell is also a 12 point favourite over Carole James as the leader who would make the better Premier of British Columbia. Gordon Campbell is the choice of 50% of British Columbians, compared to 38% for Carole James.

Ipsos did the math

That was, of course, a month and a few days ago, maybe you guys are right and it's all changed.

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein

best Canadian cities/regions

From Canadian Business Online magazine, it looks as if Campbell has been fooling only himself if he thinks BC is the Best Place on Earth.

The very pro-business magazine ranks communities across Canada for liveability. Included in their gathering of facts to make their lists is included affordability, climate, walking to work, income, unemployment, crime, etc.

It seems to me that Campbell's policy of selling off the province at the expense of the poor has back-fired in other ways, not just in added expense; and, although services (health care) have been reduced considerably, the further one gets from the traffic, pollution, and crime of the Lower Mainland, the better one is doing - generally speaking.

Pre-Campbell there were many more BC cities in the top 50

Only two BC communities made it into the top 50:
Ft. St. John: 14
Victoria: 37

Other BC places -found further down on the list:

Port Hope & Hope 55
Vancouver 69
Dawson Creek 83
Chilliwack 94
Prince George 95
Vernon 96
Penticton 97
Courtney 98
Prince Rupert 99
Kamloops 101
Williams Lake 102
Duncan 104
Kitimat 105
Campbell River 106
Port Alberni 108

http://tinyurl.com/659xy8

Interesting to note:
No city in the Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley made it into the top 50. And only Vancouver, Chilliwack and Hope made the list at all.

Especially notable by their absence:
None of the places along the Sea to Sky highway from Whistler to North Vancouver was on the list: it is just too unaffordable. Good luck to all the fat cats wanting to find someone to mow their grass or clean their condo for less than $30 an hour!

Tronna, right?

Oh, those Torontonians. Sometimes we wonder if they know as much about Vancouver as we find many of our US friends know. They also say the cheapest place to live in Canada is Timmins! Heey, let's go to Timmins and buy a cheap house. You go first Sharing, let me know how wonderful it is.

Canada comes in 4 here, up from 5 when the Liberals were running Ottawa.

Business environment ranks and scores
2008-12
Denmark 8.76
Finland 8.74
Singapore 8.73
Canada 8.71

The Economist Intelligence Unit's business rankings model measures the quality and attractiveness of the business environment in the 82 countries covered by Country Forecasts using a standard analytical framework. It is designed to reflect the main criteria used by companies to formulate their global business strategies, and is based not only on historical conditions but also on expectations about conditions prevailing over the next five years. This allows the Economist Intelligence Unit to use the regularity, depth and detail of its forecasting work to generate a unique set of forward-looking business environment rankings on a regional and global basis. The business rankings model examines ten separate criteria or categories, covering the political environment, the macroeconomic environment, market opportunities, policy towards free enterprise and competition, policy towards foreign investment, foreign trade and exchange controls, taxes, financing, the labour market and infrastructure. Each category contains a number of indicators which are assessed by the Economist Intelligence Unit for the last five years and the next five years.

The World's Most Livable Cities is an informal name given to any list of cities as they rank on a reputable annual survey of living conditions. The two best-known are the Mercer Quality of Living Survey and The Economist's World's Most Livable Cities. Another is the LivCom-Award, which separates cities in categories by population. This survey is supported by the UN.

The Economist Intelligence Unit's livability shows cities in Canada, Australia, Austria and Switzerland as the most ideal destinations thanks to a widespread availability of goods and services, low personal risk and an effective infrastructure. The report placed Vancouver, BC, Canada as the most livable city in the world, with Melbourne, Vienna and Geneva sharing joint second place. The survey said "In the current global political climate, it is no surprise that the most desirable destinations are those with a lower perceived threat of terrorism."

Corrections

Correction, Frank, the polls quoted were for November, 2007 and March, 2008, making the seven and two months old, respectively. In addition, the numbers for the government have hardly changed since the election. However, the NDP has bled considerable support to the Green Party, probably due to back peddling in environmental issues.

Which, in our present system is more than enough to form a majority government, which is all that matters.

And Ed, how is the bomb shelter coming along? Stocked up with 300 guns and a couple of million rounds of ammo? Tell them academics, Ed. They are all wrong and you are right.

Obviously.

It is my guess that, unless they live in Vancouver, then the Econmist Intelligence Unit writers don't live in Canada. It is also my guess that they have not taken a look at communitees with under 2 million people. Most communities in Canada are not part of Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver mega-tropolises.

So, Canada is up a bit on the world list from your source which I have never read. In Canadian Business Magazine Victoria dropped from the top 10 to 34, Vancouver went from the top 10 to 69.

Put whatever spin and obfuscation you want on the findings, the rest of Canada is waking up to the fact that Vancouver under Campbell:

* is the bank robbery capital of Canada.
* has thousands of people living in squallor on the streets.
* is the least affordable city in Canada.
* and, as part of BC has had:
** a decline in personal earnings.
** increase in gambling
** increase in drug addiction
** increase in alcohol consumption
** increase in seniors waiting for a place to live
** reduction of services to students, the poor, children, the aged and the infirm.

Sharing

...and is still growing - like crazy1

...and Gordon Campbell is still the favoured leader by 12 points.

real estate slowing past 2 yrs

It is not quite as hot as you think. Things are starting to look mighty shakey. Wait until the reality of tourists not coming and trees not being shipped starts hitting home. Things will only get worse:

http://www.realtylink.org/statistics/monthlyreport.cfm?news=0408&TYPE=buyers

http://www.realtylink.org/hpi/rebgvhpistats.cfm?date=0308&TYPE=buyers

http://www.realtylink.org/statistics/search_sold_listed.cfm

http://www.realtylink.org/statistics/search_sold_listed.cfm

http://www.realtylink.org/statistics/search_sold_listed.cfm

other places

Other cities in other countries have had growing populations in the past and the present, but doesn't mean I want to live there, nor does it mean it is a great place to live.

Mexico City
Bagdad
Bejing
Bombay
Umduran
Addis Abeba
Kano
Omdurman
Delhi
Calcutta
Karachi
Shanghai
Moscow
Jakarta
Tehran
Bogata
Seoul
Hong Kong
Ar-Rihad
Los Angeles
Houston
Atlanta
Las Vegas

My opinion, realisticman

My opinion of the value of Ipsos-Reid’s polling is well known to readers here. Results from the strategic partner of Can West Global are, in my view, next to useless: Using demographically bogus samples to create the desired result only fools those individuals too witless to look at:
(a) the questions asked, and;
(b) the make up of the sample.

For anyone who’ll take the time to review both of the above, it will become eminently clear why the results are less than worthless and, in my view, purpose-built to create the false impression that Gordon Campbell is popular among the gullible and poorly informed.

Increasing the size of the sample group from high income individuals is a good way to make Gordon look good. It is a dishonest way to reflect the real feelings of British Columbians.

I showed you quite clearly, and in the only poll which means anything, that the Campbell government got fewer votes than its two main opponents.

I am absolutely certain that the current situation, Can West Global and Realisticman to the contrary, would reflect a significant erosion of his 2005 support.

As for City Person, I cannot understand why the offensive and bizarre remarks he's leveled at Ed Deak on this thread have not been redacted before now.

How many times is it necessary to push the offensive button on this guy?

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Economist Intelligence Unit

Economist Intelligence Unit:

Has main offices in 7 countries.
None in Canada.
2 offices in the USA: New York & Miami

http://www.eiu.com/index.asp

By the way, Realisticman

You're the one who posted this, weren't you?

There are nothing but opinions available relative to whether or not my impression of the mood of the populace is any more accurate than yours - despite your penchant for asserting otherwise.

The following are the only FACTS available. If you check, you'll find that G West was the one who posted them.

Remember?

[source: elections BC]

Or is someone else putting words in your mouth again?

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee. I just don't get very many of them.

G West

Interesting Logic

Using your logic, GWest, then Glen Clark was not entitled to be premier, since he got only
39.45%.

In 1991, Mike Harcourt got 40.71%.

In fact, no NDP premier ever attained the popular vote Gordon Campbell got in 2005. Dave Barrret got 39.59%.

Campbell got 57.62% in 2001, the largest landslide in BC's history.

Therefore, none of the three NDP premiers in our provincial rule had a mandate to govern using you logic.

Frank...

Again, you're kind of ignoring what's happened in provincial politics there since. Note the collapse of the third party.

When the Liberals substantially increased their Manitoba vote in the '88, '90, and '95 elections (and also became the official opposition), the NDP tanked to 24%, 29%, and 33% respectively.

When the Liberals subsequently tanked to ~15% and much of that vote drifted over to the NDP, the NDP vote went up. I wouldn't categorize that Liberal vote as "left-wing" at all.

Doer's governance was "neo-Liberal" in order to attract and keep that vote.

No they weren't. That's why the NDP vote was at a record high of 46% in '79 and 45% in '83. Vander Zalm was even a more right-wing neo-con, which ushered in the Harcourt NDP.

I will again re-iterate that NDP governence in Canada is neo-liberal (just as the SFU poly-sci prof described above)... not necessarily in the classical sense as there are different shades of neo-liberalism.

Again, neo-conservatism is an even more right wing form of governance. Vander Zalm, Bush, perhaps even Harper (as opposed to Chretien and Martin).

In that same vein, there are certainly differences between a centre-left liberal, a social democrat, a democratic socialist, and a socialist.

But I guess it all boils down to one's own political perspective.

For example, I know that the poster Budd Campbell herein is both a moderate provincial and federal New Democrat. Yet even he acknowledges that many posters herein are from the so-called "hard left" (above).

And even though Budd Campbell is a moderate New Democrat, poster ME2 categorizes him as follows:

Again, it all comes down to one's perspective and where one is situate on the political spectrum.

Some Opinion Poll Pointers...

Both Mustel and Ipsos have always been considered the gold standard of BC provincial public opinion over the past ~15 years.

During that time frame, both the NDP and Liberals have led these opinion polls and I have never heard any New Democrat, Liberal or Green attempt to discredit their respective poll results.

Both Ipsos and Mustel typically mirror each others poll results.

It seems that some on here attempt to discredit both Ipsos and Mustel 'cause they just don't like the results. C'est la vie.

Mustel has a proven level of accuracy:

Example:

2005 BC election:

Liberal 45.2%(forecast) 45.8%(actual)
NDP 40.5% (forecast) 41.5% (actual)
Green 11.7% (forecast) 9.2% (actual)
Other 2.0% (forecast) 3.5% (actual)

- A 4% vote spread;

http://www.mustelgroup.com/accuracy.asp

Those results were virtually bang on in my books.

One year ago, during April, 2007, Ipsos had the following BC results:

Liberal - 49%
NDP - 32%
Green - 15%

- A 17% vote spread;

An analysis of those results, super-imposed upon the 79 seat legislature, was as follows:

Liberal - 63 seats;
NDP - 16 seats;

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/002353.html

David Schreck, former New Democrat MLA, also has analyzed these numbers and came to the conclusion:

http://www.strategicthoughts.com/record2008/fedbyelections.html

... which would equate to around 17 NDP seats.

One year later during April, 2008, Mustel had similar BC results to Ipsos (April, 2007):

Liberal - 49%
NDP - 31%
Green - 17%

- An 18% vote spread;

While a year is an eternity in politics, if these numbers have stabilized, I can't foresee what the NDP can do to turn 'em around in terms of their current leadership.

Likely current voter preference rests on what is seen as the "lesser of two evils".

Luke

Luke Skywalker:

Fiscal year ending 2007: $25.874 billion;

Those are the figures from public accounts. I've even double-checked 'em.

Here is a link to the 2006-07 Provincial Debt Summary:

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PA_2007_ProvDebt.pdf

Go to page 112, ad read the third row from the bottom ("Taxpayer–supported debt"). If you can do that, you will see the number 28.841 billion $.

You know some analysts working at these credit agencies? Well you might ask them for me what the formula is that they use to determine credit rating, as I'd honestly like to know. If you don't know anyone working for any of them, then bringing these credit rating agencies is just a red herring, as none of what you've quoted bears in any way on my point about your pretend surpluses. I think we've been over this on a previous thread...

No. The Winnipeg Free Press, Manitoba's largest circulating daily is owned by FP Canadian Newspapers, which also owns the Brandon Sun. The Winnipeg Sun is owned by Sun Media. CanWest Global does not own any local daily newspapers in Manitoba, despite that their headquarters are located in Winnipeg.

And what about Gary Doer and the Manitoba NDP has been neo-liberal? You make this claim, so provide some examples.

let's stick with the facts

No amount of opinion polls will change the fact that Campbell has been a very bad manager of the public purse, and the public welfare. This, despite having the province enter a period of record-breaking prices for the commodities it has had to sell. He has squandered so much!

Oh Jimmy...

Fiscal year ending 2001: $24.998 billion

Public Accounts - Page 98

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/01-02/PA%202002%20Debt.pdf

Fiscal year ending 2007: $25.874 billion;

Public Accounts - Page 121

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PublicAccounts.pdf

You are kidding right???? lol ... No provincial NDP MLA has ever disputed the ~ $13 billion provincial surpluses over the past 4 years!

... and the billions paid down from the 2001, 2002, 2003 deficits... etc. etc.

Is this gonna now be Carole James position??

If it is, she's toast politically!

Again:

A reputable SFU poli-sci prof, who specializes in political economy, comparative public policy, and Canadian politics, writes a book entitled:

"Paradigm Shift: Globalization and the Canadian State (2001; 2nd edition 2005"

Stephen McBride
B.Sc. (Econ.) (London)
M.A., Ph.D. (McMaster University)

Simon Fraser University
Department of Political Science

www.sfu.ca/politics/faculty/full_time/mcgr.ht

An extract from that book is as follows:

Quote:

In Canada, Bob Rae (ONDP), Roy Romanow (SKNDP), Gary Doer(MBNDP) and Jean Chretien have all governed as neoliberals.

Even when we elect social democratic or liberal parties into government, we get neoliberal governance.

Now if you disagree with his (and my) opinion, among others, of neo-liberalism, simply e-mail the poly-sci prof with your definition and correct him. Simple as that. :)

BTW, Rae is now, well, a full-fledged Liberal as well as former BC premier Ujjal Dosanjh. ;)

Unfortunately City Person

Neither logic nor accurate reading is your strong point.

If you can show me where I wrote any such thing as what you've alleged then please do so. The discussion, I'd remind you, is about whether or not Gordon Campbell has the support of the majority of British Columbians.

I simply demonstrated that he didn't. It wasn't hard.

As for the other NDP governments, I'm more than prepared to move to proportional representation any time and this province - had we done so in 1952 - would have been much better served in the intervening half century. For those who prefer to live in the past it would be an interesting exercise in alternative history.

I'm actually much more interested in preserving something of this place for future generations.

Unfortunately, we have a CEO Premier who apparently couldn't care less.

All this, I'd add, in my opinion. I'm not so dismissive of the views of the majority of my fellow citizens and the complexity of their attitudes and skills as you apparently are.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts here at Tyee.

G West

BTW Jimmy...

Most people prefer TV news anyway, eg. Global BCTV... and here's Global Winnipeg:

http://www.canada.com/globaltv/winnipeg/index.html

City Person

Since I didn't mention anything about the "timing" I assume you confused the fact I was calling realisticman a 5 year old and instead assumed I was saying "5 years ago...".

You're the one that said above that the NDP can win, I said they can't. Remember? If you want to believe that they can, hey, its a free country.

But like Realisticman I have trouble understanding the motivation and the maturity level of someone who insists on arguing their enemy can win an election and then gloats over the fact they don't.

By all means feel free to make my points for me.

Polls

If anyone believes polls, it is politicians. They live and breathe by them. They are very accurate any any political organisation that chooses to ignore them is very unwise indeed.

But then again, I also tend to disbelieve what I do not like. I can't believe that I had to pay CRA this year. It must be a mistake or being framed my neo-con fat cat roaders!

Sorry to hear that, Frank

I am sorry to hear that the party you support cannot, in your opinion, win power in BC. I believe with a shift in leadership and policy they can.

Good points, GWest

You make a good point here, GWest. I hope you express it at the ballot box next May.

Luke

Luke, you keep making it sound like Doer was the first NDP premier in Manitoba. Google Howard Pawley and Ed Shreyer. Manitoba has a history of voting for NDP premiers, not just ones voted sexy by Chatelaine.

Well I prefer the definition that appears in dictionaries and Wikipedia etc. However, its possible that the SFU prof will change everyone's mind, I haven't read his book.

Didn't the SFU prof include Harper in his neo-Liberal definition?

Yes! That's what I've been saying!

As you know I have no trouble with that, I consider myself on the far left. On the other hand I don't consider Budd to be even a moderate.

Yes, yes yes.

Frank...

Nope, just the Chretien Liberals.

I assume he would classify Harper in the neo-conservative mold, based upon his other book:

http://www.sfu.ca/politics/faculty/full_time/mcgr.html

Westie, with respect

Just a little bit, just a little bit,

Yet you are dismissive of a poll that is a few weeks new, of 800 BCers done by a company with headquarters in Paris, who you suggest:

Increasing the size of the sample group from high income individuals is a good way to make Gordon look good. It is a dishonest way to reflect the real feelings of British Columbians.

"Purpose built", hey that's quite a charge, and you insist on the only facts are those of the election - years ago. Elections are the only poll that really matters but your pompous attitude is nauseating. I don't know how you get away with this stuff.

Luke

Nope, just the Chretien Liberals.

I assume he would classify Harper in the neo-conservative mold, based upon his other book:

That would be strange since Mike Harris was in the Neo-Liberal camp and I think Harris was as or more right-wing than Harper. But again, I haven't read the book.

the gargler is cooked

If campbell wasn`t running scared he would not be trying to stifle freedom of speech with a third party limits on campaign advertising!

Nobody but fools are buying this gas tax,
playground equipment and booster seats hit home and it hurt the gargler.

Changing schools title from college to universirty does not justify the 68 million dollar funding shortfall to these institutions at the last minute!

campbell has OFFENDED EVERYONE--seniors-students-teachers--unions-the law--ferry workers -teachers--hospital workers-transit users-hydro users--the poor --the needy-MUNICIPAL ELECTED OFFICIALS--absolutely everyone!

CAMPBELLS worried -read michael smyth column in friday province-

People are disgusted with spending on art centers,bc place,olympics, convention center,p3s,India gate,and on and on!

He is f#####g scared hes trying to stifle everyone with a voice --HUBEROUS IS GORDOS ENEMY--He`s a arrogant,soon to be olympic private citizen spectator,who will live the rest of his life looking over his shoulder!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frank...

Wooahhhhh! :) NADA!!!

The old popular Ontario PC's under Bill Davis were centrist and neo-liberal in governance.

Other conservatives in the federal PC Party accused him of damaging the conservative image in Canada by moving to the left on some issues.

OTOH, Mike Harris was from the right-wing of the OPC's and was the penultimate Canadian neo-conservative. He would make the Reform Party proud.

Harris made a mess of Ontario.

I know, I know, it's wikipedia but it should suffice for this purpose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Progressive_Conservative_Party

City Person

Don't worry about it, its not something I lose any sleep over. On the other hand I'm sorry to hear you guys that love the Campbell gov't are so easily pleased.

Not exactly Realisticman

I posted my problems with the poll here, on another story, in descriptive detail - I posted, above, a short summary of the reasons. The sample was not demographically or economically representative of the electorate. Simple.

Why would I bother doing any more?

Pompous attitude?

Pray tell, my friend, who's the person going around calling other people names?

Need I remind you? I don't know how YOU get away with this stuff.

It's not me who behaves like a petulant child when holes are poked in an argument.

You might try avoiding the name calling, it isn't endearing in an interlocutor. Furthermore, if you don’t find something fundamentally offensive with the proposition that someone like Ed Deak is a militant survivalist at 80+ years of age then I’d suggest you need to think again about what it actually means to be pompous and offensive.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Still hung up on the definitions

Mind you, from what I've seen of your prof's book, he is too.

I don't think I'll be pulling it from the library anytime soon.

Furthermore, reliance upon wikipedia seems unlikely to provide you with much enlightenment.

Perhaps you'd care to explore another example of this at Wiki - it is a bit of an eye-opener and may give you some insight into the tendentious nature of the process of turning current affairs into history

Start here:
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/002082.html

with Sean Holman and then take your time tracing the history of what goes on when a dedicated bunch of sock-puppets decide to do a re-write .

I'd say your 'professor's' misuse of the term Neo liberal amounts to pretty much the same thing.

Now, could we possibly, please, return to the actual subject of this story?

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Ohhh Geee West....

If you are so confident that Paris-based Ipsos is either incompetent and/or fraudulent, then simply e-mail Ipsos Canada's head Daryl Bricker, under your real name and advise them directly.

Here's Bricker's e-mail address:

Darrell.Bricker@ipsos-reid.com

Heck, you should have nothing to worry about with your apparent background in probability, statistics, and market research.

brian gough

Funny that. As in Huber Banjos, I guess.

http://www.huberbanjos.com/c_huber_banjos.htm

Not quite able to ascertain the analogy Bri. Care to expatiate on that?

pro campbell guys

I've noticed that rather than deal with facts of a specific thread that points to Liberal government waste, inefficiency, corruption, chronyism, etc. many Gordon Campbell cheerleaders often resort to talking about polls about how popular he is. I know it is hard, but let's stay on topic. Monte Paulson has written a fine article, and no amount of poll-quoting will make Gordon Campbell a better manager. He's a terrible premier, and he surrounds himself with arrogant minions who often have nothing of value to say when they are confronted with their own incompetence.

Luke

Wooahhhhh! :) NADA!!!

OTOH, Mike Harris was from the right-wing of the OPC's and was the penultimate Canadian neo-conservative. He would make the Reform Party proud.

Well, your SFU prof did in fact put Mike Harris in the Neo_Liberal camp along with Gary Doer, Jean Chretien, Brian Mulroney, Ralph Klein and pretty much every other leader federally and provincially in Canada over the past 30 years.

SharingIsGood

That's what happens with every story. If tomorrow there was a story on kids in foster care and anybody dared agree with the story the troops would be assembled and the gov't would be defended based on their polling numbers. Its like a broken record around here.

Frank...

and pretty much every other leader federally and provincially in Canada over the past 30 years.

Well, the SFU prof is obviously from the centre-left of the political spectrum.

Bill Vander Zalm, Mike Harris, Preston Manning???

Neo-conservative.

I guess, though, from the perspective of the far left, that there is not much difference between a neo-lib or a neo- con. :)

Luke Skywalker Quote:Fiscal

Luke Skywalker

Public Accounts - Page 98

www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/01-02/PA%202002%

Fiscal year ending 2007: $25.874 billion;

Public Accounts - Page 121

www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PublicAccounts

The number you have quoted is "Reconciliation of Summary Financial Statements' Surplus to Change in Taxpayer–supported Debt and Total Debt" whereas I have quoted "Reconciliation of Total Debt to the Summary Financial Statements Debt". I am not sure what the difference is. They are both labelled "Total debt". Perhaps you know?

pretend surpluses

You are kidding right???? lol ... No provincial NDP MLA has ever disputed the ~ $13 billion provincial surpluses over the past 4 years!

I have no idea what any NDP MLAs say on this issue, nor is it important to me.

There have been surpluses (though by ignoring the mountain of hidden debt I mentioned above and in other threads), sure, but not 13 billion $.

I don't know, maybe you should ask her.

"Paradigm Shift: Globalization and the Canadian State (2001; 2nd edition 2005"

I asked you for examples. Have you even read the book? No, surely you've read the book. Surely you've not just read the review and then mindlessly parroted an excerpt. That would be totally unlike you.

I simply asked what policies Doer had made that were you thought neo-liberal in nature. You've not provided any. I can't agree or disagree with your opinion until you do. And while your at it, you might dig up the definition of neo-liberalism as McBride uses it in his book, as you have no doubt read the book.

You know what most people prefer? Really? Anyway, you can't compare the CanWest's saturation of print media in BC, in addition to their television station, to a single TV news show (ignoring, of course, the "specialty" channels, which are almost all entertainment channels, and none of which provide local news).

west

As Luke says West, perhaps you should let Bricker know. I can forward your concerns to the co-chairmen in Paris, Didier Truchot and Jean-Marc Lech, if you like, Je parle francais.

We don't want unethical polling companies here. Why wait for the election to prove them wrong.

Can I quote you?

Luke

I haven't read his book of course but if he's centre-left he either has a low opinion of Romanow, Rae and Doer or a high opinion of Harris and Klein.

Neo-conservative.

I wouldn't call Zalm a neo-con. A soc-con, sure.

I doubt the prof is far Left but in my case, yes, I don't see much difference between Libs and Cons or Neo-Libs and Neo-Cons.

Anyway, we should move on.

Luke

Vancouver Sun Business columnists have.

I've lived under every known

I've lived under every known ideology and am still trying to find out what are the "right and left wings" ? Especially the nonsense of "centre left, or right" ?

The political spectrum is not on the horizontal, but on the vertical scale, like the C and R on thermometers, the majority down at the bottom, while the two sides, divided by a thin line, screaming at each other more, louder and hysterical, the higher they are.

I call this a "nut ladder". So where are the names mentioned above, on the scale of this nut ladder ?

Ideologies and all faith based theories are dead and the sooner humanity realizes this, the sooner they may start working for a real, sustainable and better future.

City.....You're losing it kid, or as Ann Landers would say: "Better get some professional help...."

Ed Deak.

Correction, typo error .....

Correction, typo error ..... Should be "C and F on thermometers"

Nobody is using R any more.

Ed Deak.

Please Realisticman and Luke Skywalker

Try to quote me accurately. This is what I wrote:

The sample was not demographically or economically representative of the British Columbia electorate. Simple.

I assume, therefore that you two have your own evidence for this claim:

Because I would never say or write any such thing.

Et moi, Je parle français aussi. Merci beaucoup.

Again, I think the pompousness is emanating from quite another source - furthermore, I'm very pleased to see you now concur with my point that the only poll which matters will take place on May 12, 2009.

I appreciate the concession.

The next concession, the one I'd really like to have you address, is to actually deal with the subject matter of the journalism.

Do you, or do you not think that the Campbell Government's approach to poverty, welfare, the minimum wage and services to the poor and to children in care has been successful and good value for the taxpayers’ trust and taxes? This government has been in power for some time and I think it is well past due to have its record examined.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Ed

Réaumur has gone the way of the Scheiner and DIN lumens scales, Ed. Almost metric and quite logical but pure metric won. I'm still waiting for metric time; 100 secs = 1 minute, 100 minutes = 1 hour, etc.

West

So you're withdrawing this?

Jimmy...

The link that you provided also has the same taxpayer-supported debt figure for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2007 in the amount of $25.874 billion that I stated earlier.

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/06_07/PA_2007_ProvDebt.pdf

(page 112)

Yes ~$13 billion... Remember that the Liberals ill-timed tax cuts in 2001 resulted in a hole in subsequent provincial budgets (as economist David Bond of HSBC then predicted). It was a bad move.

That resulted in the taxpayer-supported debt increasing from $25 billion in fiscal year ending March 31, 2001 to $32 billion in fiscal year ending March 31, 2004.

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/ocg/pa/03_04/PA_2004_Debt.pdf

An increase of ~$7 billion!

Now at least you will agree with me that in subsequent fiscal years, taxpayer-supported debt was paid down by the approximate amount of $6 billion???

... when the taxpayer-supported debt for fiscal year ending March 31, 2007 was $25.874 billion???

And then there were subsequent tax cuts, costing the provincial treasury billions and one-time infrastructure investments in the billion range.

Certainly complex from a total financial perspective over the March 31, 2001 to March 31, 2007 fiscal years (and I didn't touch on the recently ended fiscal year 2008).

Well, a recent story in the Tyee might provide some anecdotal evidence:

http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2006/11/06/Newspapers/

OTOH, Global (BCTV 6:00 pm) Newshour (along with it's Early News, Newshour Final, and Weekend News) places in the Top 10 for the local Nielsen ratings. (um... results published every Thursday in the Vancouver Sun) :)

Fiat Lux...

You are absolutley right!!!

I watch Global for the lies

I would really rather watch Global for the truth, but I end up watching it to see what kind of inanane crap they are trying to feed the public instead of good, balanced, relevant, fact-based news. This, of course, is just my opinion.

After watching Global, I get a good idea of what important stories they were missing or only half-telling so I can inform my rather large network of friends and colleagues of their errors. My associates are always grateful. I do this and I am not a paid media monitor for any political party - just doing my bit to try to preserve some democracy.

Not at all, Realisticman, with respect

Anyone who uses a responder mix for a polling sample that does not reflect the reality of the demographics of the population they are polling must, by definition, be out to create a false impression.

Either that, or they're more into information management and marketing than measuring opinions. Given the fact that CanWest Global is the 'strategic partner' of Ipsos Reid and Can West is, as you well know, a very significant supporter and financial backer of the Campbell government it is hardly surprising that such might be the case.

I'd refer you to a series of letters between Conrad Black and Izzy Asper which formed part of the evidence in the Black trial in Chicago if you don't think that the management of CanWest has had more than journalism in mind.

I think the same thing is often true of commenters here who refuse, Willy Nilly, to actually address the 'record' of the current government and disdain from discussing what seems, on the evidence, to be a thoroughgoing failure to address the needs and shortcomings of our least advantaged and most challenged citizens.
Why is that?

Sometimes I get sufficiently cynical to think that is purpose-built as well. Little about this thread’s comments has disabused me from that conclusion.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Oh Geeee West...

Earlier posts:

The [Ipsos] sample was not demographically or economically representative of the electorate. Simple.

LK in response:

If you are so confident that Paris-based Ipsos is either incompetent and/or fraudulent, then simply e-mail Ipsos Canada's head Daryl Bricker, under your real name and advise them directly.

G West you made a legal statement of fact.

Hmmmmm ... now do you REALLY think people on here (or Ipsos?) are gullible enough when you obfuscate as follows: lol

G West:

Paris-based Ipsos is either incompetent and/or fraudulent...

Shame on you G West for making false and misleading statements, not only about Ipsos but now also about my own previous post!!!!!

Luke Skywalker: Quote:The

Luke Skywalker:

Yes, that's what I said in my previous post. Thank you for repeating. So what's the difference then?

No. As I've said before, not 13 billion $.

No. Depending which type of "taxpayer-supported debt" you look at, the difference (between 2004 and 2007) is either 3.7 billion $ or 590 million $.

That's about Vancouver. I thought we were talking about Manitoba? Speaking of Manitoba, any luck yet with an exposition of some of Doer's neo-liberal policies?

Balderdash 101

that does not reflect the reality of the demographics of the population they are polling must, by definition, be out to create a false impression.

The polling orgainisations at issue here have all been extraordinarily accurate in prediction electoral outcomes for the last fifty or so years. This is particularly so in the last few British Columbia provincial elections. They are equally accurate federally as well.

Just because you don't agree with the results doesn't mean they are faulty.

So someone else is posting in your name Luke Skywalker

Ohhh Geee West....
Commentor
Luke Skywalker
2 hours ago

Quote:

The [Ipsos] sample was not demographically or economically representative of the electorate. Simple.

If you are so confident that Paris-based Ipsos is either incompetent and/or fraudulent, then simply e-mail Ipsos Canada's head Daryl Bricker, under your real name and advise them directly.

Here's Bricker's e-mail address:

Darrell.Bricker@ipsos-reid.com

Heck, you should have nothing to worry about with your apparent background in probability, statistics, and market research.

I'll await your apology

Thanks.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

G West..

You are FRAUDULENT.

Not at all. Respectfully Luke

The bolded words were yours, not mine.

The sample in that Ipsos Reid poll did not accurately reflect the economic reality of the provincial population. It over-represented the proportion of high-income earners and under-represented the proportion of lower income earners.

Those are simple facts - I'd suggest you stop calling people names and read this, from 2005:

http://www.straight.com/article/are-polls-pushing-voters-toward-liberals

And that's the last time

I'll respond to anything you post unless you start to actually deal with what I say and not what you'd like to think I said.

Now, about Gordon Campbell's record. Could we discuss how the 'greatest place on earth' is such a hell-hole for children in care, single mothers, the homeless, welfare recipients and the old?

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West

Oh Jimmy...

Yes, that's what I said in my previous post. Thank you for repeating. So what's the difference then?

Huhh?

Well, just $ 3 billion, chump change!

Luke Skywalker: Quote:Well,

Luke Skywalker:

Yes, thank you, I realise the dollar value difference between the two. My question was rather about the difference between the quoted debt in the following sections in the public accounts: "Reconciliation of Summary Financial Statements' Surplus to Change in Taxpayer–supported Debt and Total Debt" and "Reconciliation of Total Debt to the Summary Financial Statements Debt".

Oops

I should have said "the difference in definition between the quoted debt in the following sections in the public accounts...".

Hardly Unbiased

GWest, now I realise where you got your "the polls aren't accurate" mantra. It was Bill Tieleman, who is about as much as an NDP rah-raher as it gets.

Blaming polls for election results is like blaming the Environment Canada for the weather.

Pardon Me, City Person, you are completely wrong

If you were actually paying attention you'd have realized I posted the analysis of the demographics in that particular poll days ago.

I have lots of respect for Bill Tieleman, but in this case I wasn't 'following' anyone - neither am I blaming polls for anything.

The problem is the people who accept polling results without an understanding of the way the poll is conducted and the sample is created.

Without a sufficiently large sample and careful attention to how the sample accurately reflects the demographics of the total population the results are meaningless.

Creating a sample which over-emphasizes the number of respondents from a particular category and under-represents other segments of the population is mischievous; believing that it means anything is naive.

The points I made about that poll were included, weeks ago, in posts to another story here at Tyee. If I thought re-posting the evidence was worthwhile I would do so - however, I'm quite certain all but a couple of my readers already got the point.

I'm still disappointed at the complete absence of discussion about the subject matter of the journalism.

I always invite respectful comments to my posts at Tyee.

G West