Austerity Coming to Ontario 2

M. Spector wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

if anything we can take from the struggles in greece is that debt and austerity are vehicles to transfer wealthe to the 1%. the priority is coming together and organizing to defeating these measures.

Exactly. Unfortunately, it appears the Ontario NDP will be following in the footsteps of their social-democratic colleagues in Greece.

Instead of hailing McGuilty's corporate tax "freeze" at a measly 11.5%, they should be calling for - at the very least - a return to the paltry 14% corporate tax rate that applied less than two years ago. Sid Ryan says such a modest step "could balance the books without job loss or cuts to services". 

If Sid Ryan said that he's incorrect. According to CUPE, taking the Ontario corporate tax rate back to 14% would raise $2.5 billion, nowhere near enough to balance the books when the deficit is over $15 billion. See:

http://cupe.ca/economics/austerity-doesnt-work-ontario-balance

M. Spector wrote:

If an election is forced over the budget the voters will have a chance to vote either for or against austerity. Should we be deprived of that chance to actually make a democratic choice, or should we capitulate to the agenda of the One Percent? Should we fear the voters and our ability to present an alternative vision, and arrange things so that we have as little democracy as possible?

I get your drift, but it sounds to me like you are viewing the world through rose-coloured glasses. Do Ontarians want another election? I'm in Quebec, so I don't know. My instincts say Ontarians will probly be annoyed enough with having to have another expensive election that they'll give McQuinty another, stronger mandate.

"The idea that voting against the budget may force an election is bull, sorry."

Federally, a budget is a confidence vote. Is it not so provincially?

Boom Boom wrote:

"The idea that voting against the budget may force an election is bull, sorry."

Federally, a budget is a confidence vote. Is it not so provincially?

Yes, it is.

When does the vote on the Ontario budget take place? I wonder if there be any polling before that vote? I'd be interested to see the polling results.

M. Spector wrote:

After all, Ontarians voted for minority government last time. Don't you remember, it was right there on the ballot! So we are now obliged to make minority government work, by effectively letting Dalton rule as if he had a majority!

Millions of votes were wasted, and another four million plus didn't bother voting.

I guess I just don't see what's so scary about the [i]possibility[/i] of another election. [I'm guessing that Maysie's point was that the 3rd place party can't "force" an election. If an election is triggered it'll be a group effort brought about by the [b]Liberals[/b] presenting an intolerable budget, and the New Democrats [b]and the Tories[/b] voting against it.] No one knows what the outcome of such an election would be, but what's the worst case scenario? The NDP gets wiped-out? There's no more New Democrats at Queen's Park? How is that any worse than having 17 New Democrats who vote on what will likely be this legislature's most important piece of legislation [i]as if they were Liberals[/i]? What's the difference to the average Ontarian? Am I supposed to give a shit if Horwath loses her seat and has to find work elsewhere?

Maysie wrote:

The idea that voting against the budget may force an election is bull, sorry.

Shame on you.

For someone who is so hyper-critical of others you might want to check your facts.  The government controls the order paper.  All money bills are automatically votes of confidence in the Westminister parliamentary system.  When the government places the budget vote on the order paper for the day there will be three options facing the NDP. 

1. do nothing and abstain because they do not support the budget, but won't force an election 

2. vote for the budget as it is presented (which at that point may or may not include amendments)

3. vote against the budget which will cause the government to fall (assuming all the PCs show up and also vote against as they have signalled- which I actually doubt they will do- they are in no shape to go into an election either.)

Those are the choices.  There are no others.  So the NDP is exactly correct in their poll.  Exactly.  What you suggest is pure hypebole and not how our system works.  It is fantasy of the most ignorant kind.

The real shame should be on all those people who supported and stressed the need to strategicly vote for the McGuinty Liberals.  Now we have the worse of all worlds.  Hudak policies with no way to really stop them short of another election.  If you voted strategically and suggested others should do so and are upset with the budget the person you should blame is staring back at you from the mirror.

Freedom 55 wrote:

I guess I just don't see what's so scary about the [i]possibility[/i] of another election. [I'm guessing that Maysie's point was that the 3rd place party can't "force" an election. If an election is triggered it'll be a group effort brought about by the [b]Liberals[/b] presenting an intolerable budget, and the New Democrats [b]and the Tories[/b] voting against it.] No one knows what the outcome of such an election would be, but what's the worst case scenario? The NDP gets wiped-out? There's no more New Democrats at Queen's Park? How is that any worse than having 17 New Democrats who vote on what will likely be this legislature's most important piece of legislation [i]as if they were Liberals[/i]? What's the difference to the average Ontarian? Am I supposed to give a shit if Horwath loses her seat and has to find work elsewhere?

Really you think the budget is the worse that can happen and having no NDP MPPs there won't make a difference?  That's just plain stupid or so profoundly ignorant of all the things that can happen with no checks on them it makes no difference.   What have you missed about what is happening with a majority government on the federal scene?  Stupid is as stupid does I guess.

Maysie wrote:

The McGuinty Liberals are acting like Mike Harris Tories. This is NOT okay.

The budget isn't a hypothetical thing out there. Real people are going to be affected by it if it passes. I'm not into discussing various political maneuvers the NDP can do (namely vote with the government) unless the move is to stand up to the Liberals, reject the human-hating proposed budget and tell people why and get them onside.

Jeez, of all the points in history, now is the time! I know Ontario is still lagging behind but there's momentum in the NDP right now, isn't there?

While I appreciate ONDP asking for opinions, I cynically feel that it's a PR move, just to know how many lefties they're pissing off, and how many approve.

Yes, the ONDP is who I look to for leadership since they're all we've got. Leadership means not supporting this budget.

 

I understand the budget will hurt people, people who can least afford to be hurt.  I expect so does the NDP caucus.

However, where is your offer to donate and/or volunteer as much as possible with your demand for action.  The NDP cannot sustain an election campaign across this province on self-righteousness.  It takes money and volunteers.

This is looking like a good-cop/bad-cop shakedown on behalf of the big bankers (Drummond et al) to cut social spending and intensify the class-war that all political parties seem to be advancing. Look at Europe and see how  supposed social-democrats and 'socialist' parties rolled over there. Ours are even wimpier. Doesn't look good folks. Look who they're consulting on this latest bankster piracy:

Tim Hudak: McGuinty's Budget Must Confront the Crisis

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/27/tim-hudak-mcguintys-budge...

"Ontarians are staring at a $30 - billion deficit on a $411 billion accumulated debt. These numbers are so staggering that they lose meaning unless we step back to gain perspective. I did that recently in New York, where I met with leaders in the global financial community.

THese individuals are utterly impartial, and see things only through the unforgiving realities of global economies and market conditions. A singular theme emerged repeatedly - the link between unsustainable debt and economic growth. Businesses know that governments with high debt loads cannot afford lower taxes or the best infrastructure - two basic attractions for investment...

Ontario's debt is the symptom of an underlying illness: over spending. On that point, if there's some good thing to have emerged from the debacle in Greece, it's that people now understand how neglect of debt issues can quickly become a crisis..At such times, heavily indebted governments lose all fiscal room to manoeuvre - and can lose control of their own destinies as a result..."

This contemplated budget is precisely a strategem to 'lose all fiscal room to manoevre and lose control of their own destinies as as result'. The sellouts in government and opposition  will now dicker and dither over how best to extract maximum political capital for themselves,  while crushing those on the bottom of the economic ladder in the interests of those on top whose looting of wealth solely for their own ends, increases to unparalleled levels.

ygtbk wrote:

If Sid Ryan said that he's incorrect. According to CUPE, taking the Ontario corporate tax rate back to 14% would raise $2.5 billion, nowhere near enough to balance the books when the deficit is over $15 billion. See:

http://cupe.ca/economics/austerity-doesnt-work-ontario-balance

Quite so. Congratulations, you just found 1.5% of the budget! So we can forget about cutting that much this year, but then there's next year. If spending rises to match what was raised, the problem remains. That's not political, it's accounting. A healthy business as usual in the public sector with spending growing at 5% per year as it has the last few years can't happily co-exist with an economy growing at 2% for very long.

I would wait and see what the polls say before advocating for an election now. Does anyone really want to risk a McQuinty or Hudak majority?

Michelle wrote:

Maysie, I LOVED your responses to that "survey"!  Good for you!  I also find that it's best to just ignore people who say that you don't have a right to an opinion until you write a cheque.

Thanks for the bullshit reconstruction of my comments.  Feel free to wrongly paraphrase anyone you like.

What I said is that if you want the NDP to put their money where their mouth is, as it were, the people calling for that should also put their money where their mouth is.  That's not saying you have to write a cheque to express an opinion.  That's saying if the NDP does vote against the budget, thus making an election highly likely, the call for those actions are meaningless if you are then going to cut and run.  So by all means call for the NDP to vote down the budget, but back up your words with a willingness to help with what that will create.  It's called being responsible for your words and the deeds you are calling for in others.   Or if you like being politically mature. 

When I sent in my response that is exactly what I did.  I asked the NDP to vote down the budget, even if it meant and election and I pledged to do what I could to support the NDP in my riding and provincially so that the strongest possible message could be sent, with NDP success, about how wrong this kind of 'austerity' is when the real target is the people who had nothing to do with the economic times in the first place.  That's taking resposibility for what you are asking others to do in your name.

Yes I'm hyper-partisan.  That's the problem.  Couldn't possibly be your hyperbolic temper tantrums.

Ah so it is okay for some people to be insulting, but not others.  Oh so typical of this place.  It reminds me of high school all those years ago where the cool kids get to say anything they want, but if we nerds speak up we can expect to be shorted.

You can't scare up a more militant and active population in time for an election in May.

Ontario's 2012 Budget: Completing The Job Mike Harris Started  - by Hugh Mackenzie

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/mgregus/2012/03/ontarios-2012-budget-com...

"The crazy irony of Premier Dalton McGuinty's ninth budget is that it completes the job of cutting government down to size started by the Mike Harris CONservatives in the 1990s...the result is the same.

Ontario is not in a fiscal crisis. It is in recovery - more slowly than we would wish, but recovery -- from the deepest recession to hit the world since the 1930s.

Most notably, the budget ignores the proverbial elephant in the corner of Ontario's fiscal room - the structural fiscal capacity gap left behind by tax cuts implemented since the late 1990s that Ontario could not afford.

The budget is decidedly not fair..."

Boom Boom wrote:

Does anyone really want to risk a McQuinty or Hudak majority?

Are those the only two options? I thought the NDP was brimming with confidence these days. Why wouldn't it be an opportunity to gain seats, or even form government?

If the NDP is going to vote with the government on this Mc[b]G[/b]uinty already has his majority. So yeah, I'll take my chances with another election.

Doug wrote:

You can't scare up a more militant and active population in time for an election in May.

Nor will you ever as long as people are convinced that the needs of the public should be subservient to the needs of the party, and not the other way around.

janfromthebruce wrote:

I personally feel that Hudak would come to power and it would be hell. It would be like the lovely Harris years. I remember that election where unions sat on their butts (basically) as payback to Rae and we got Harris, and the common sense revolution - how'd you like those apples?

The post immediately preceding yours points out that the McGuilty budget is simply finishing the job that Mike Harris started. Is that what you want the NDP to support?

Yes, Rae poisoned the well so that the unions sat on their butts and let Harris in. But if Andrea Horvath said "no, we won't vote for a wage freeze for public servants" she'd have labour election volunteers coming out the wazoo for the ensuing campaign, and the vast organizational resources of the trade union movement at the disposal of electing an NDP government.

On the other hand, the NDP voting for the McGuilty budget would ensure that the labour movement sits on their hands come the next election.

Try 73, 75 and 79.  But I'm not one of the cool kids so I'm not allowed to sit at the table.  I just have to sit here while the cool kids get to fling whatever they want at others.

M. Spector wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

I personally feel that Hudak would come to power and it would be hell. It would be like the lovely Harris years. I remember that election where unions sat on their butts (basically) as payback to Rae and we got Harris, and the common sense revolution - how'd you like those apples?

The post immediately preceding yours points out that the McGuilty budget is simply finishing the job that Mike Harris started. Is that what you want the NDP to support?

Yes, Rae poisoned the well so that the unions sat on their butts and let Harris in. But if Andrea Horvath said "no, we won't vote for a wage freeze for public servants" she'd have labour election volunteers coming out the wazoo for the ensuing campaign, and the vast organizational resources of the trade union movement at the disposal of electing an NDP government.

On the other hand, the NDP voting for the McGuilty budget would ensure that the labour movement sits on their hands come the next election.

If you are going to attack people could you at least get their name right.  It is Horwath.

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

If you are going to attack people could you at least get their name right.  It is Horwath.

So the best counter you can come up with is to attack me for a typo? Not surprising.

Yes, because the harder we're squeezed the better their prospects...

our pain, their gain.