If Andrea continues to play her cards well like she has so far she will probably become premier
Liberal-NDP budget
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:11
#52
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:12
#53
I remember when babblers mocked Dion, Ignatieff and the "cowards" in the Liberal Party for refusing to pull the plug on the Harper govt...
That must have been when the Liberals negotiated all those taxes raising on rich people. I can remember it as if yesterday...
Ontario budget: NDP tax change slashes deficit, Duncan says Liberals less Fiscally Frankenstein-ish thanx to NDP
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:16
#54
If Andrea continues to play her cards well like she has so far she will probably become premier
...regardless of who she has to step on to get there.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:16
#55
TORONTO - The United Steelworkers (USW) union welcomes the modest tax increase for Ontario's richest and income increase for Ontario's poorest achieved by New Democrats in budget negotiations with the provincial government.
"The NDP has succeeded in adding some fairness to the budget while avoiding an election nobody wanted," said Wayne Fraser, USW's Ontario director. "The additional childcare funding secured by New Democrats will also make an important difference for our province's working families."
However, as NDP leader Andrea Horwath has herself emphasized, the Liberal budget remains flawed. The Centre for Spatial Economics has calculated that implementing all of the cuts envisioned by the budget for future years would eliminate 105,000 jobs in 2015 -- 65,000 in the public sector and 40,000 in the private sector. Ontario's minority parliament will provide further opportunities to negotiate constructive changes or, if necessary, defeat the government.
We are proud of Andrea Horwath and the NDP Caucus for insisting on a better budget for everyday Ontarians, and standing up for working families.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:18
#56
Andrea has clout and shouldn't be afraid to use it.
What clout does she have now? Prior to yesterday's vote she [i]had[/i] clout, but she has demonstrated that she is afraid to use it.
I'm not sure how you rationalize this statement. Are you suggesting that if she refused to negotiate and instead chose a similar uncompromising path as Hudak did that she would have had more respect and clout? I think most people respect her tactics more than Hudak's tactics, regardless of which side of the political fence they are on.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:19
#57
Cry me a river - who is she stepping on now
She is not the premier yet in case people haven't noticed.
But them's the breaks - politics is a blood sport, so get used to it.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:22
#58
Cry me a river - who is she stepping on now
[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/ontario/liberal-ndp-budget#comment-1341771]for those with short attention spans[/url]
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:24
#59
If the people of Ontario want a 100% NDP inspired budget
I haven't seen anyone here suggesting anything of the sort was possible, but that hasn't stopped the party's apologists from repeatedly trotting-out this strawperson.
Even if it were possible, it wouldn't look much different than the current Lib budget.
Sad, but based on what the NDP has shown us so far, you're probably correct.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:41
#60
Andrea has clout and shouldn't be afraid to use it.
What clout does she have now? Prior to yesterday's vote she [i]had[/i] clout, but she has demonstrated that she is afraid to use it.
Are you suggesting that if she refused to negotiate and instead chose a similar uncompromising path as Hudak did that she would have had more respect and clout?
No, that's not what I'm suggesting, although that very well could have been the case depending on how the election might have gone.
I have no problem with her being willing to negotiate with McGuinty. What bothers me is how cheaply she sold her support, especially when she was negotiating from a position of relative strength compared to McGuinty. As soon as Hudak declared his intention to vote against the budget she had clout. Almost immediately she undermined her bargaining power by making it quite clear she had no stomach for triggering another election.
Wed, 2012-04-25 17:57
#61
Things do not look good.
Maybe the budget deal Andrea cut will help the province's finances
S&P puts Ontario on negative credit watch
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/04/25/sp-cuts-ontario-credit-outl...
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:09
#62
M. Spector
Like the Hudak Conservatives, S&P thinks the Liberal-NDP Majority Government™'s austerity program doesn't go far enough into the pockets of the poor, the disabled, and the middle class public sector workers. They are hoping to ratchet up the pressure so that the next Liberal-NDP Majority Government™'s budget will go even farther.
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:20
#63
Cry me a river - who is she stepping on now
She is not the premier yet in case people haven't noticed.
But them's the breaks - politics is a blood sport, so get used to it.
Dirty-rotten FPTP politics that is. And yes, we should be used to it by now.
And remember when the federal Liberals propped-up Harper all those times by negotiating taxes raising for rich people. Wait a minute? It must never have happened. Oh well...
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:32
#64
..from the rampage thread.
http://rabble.ca/comment/1334099
Ontario hopes deep budget cuts will calm debt markets
This is a budget aimed at pleasing none, except Ontario’s creditors.
With its much-anticipated 2012 budget, the Ontario government seeks to repair the province’s deteriorating fiscal position, chip away at a debt burden headed toward unsustainability, and avoid a downgrade to its credit rating.
A mix of cost control and revenue increases will eliminate the $15.3-billion deficit over the next six years, finance minister Dwight Duncan said in the provincial legislature Tuesday.....
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/03/27/ontario-hopes-deep-budget-c...
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:38
#65
Ultimately, the banksters will steal everything that's not nailed down and drain us all dry as hay. People had better disabuse themselves of illusions of benign democracy and prepare to defend against raids against our common assets. The Rating agencies like S&P are with the raiding parties, as is Drummond, Hudak, McGuinty and Horwath if not firmly managed by an aware and motivated citizenry.
Bob Rae's NDP had the province on-track for balanced budgets way back in 1994.
Bay Street didn't like that so they backed a number of stooges since Mike Harris.
What we have today in Ontario is "wealth creation" neoliberal style. The new business plan is not pouring concrete for footings of new factories or putting people to work. The neo/new business plan says:
debt = wealth creation
McGuinty spends more on debt service charges than on economic development, post-secondary education, or transportation.
Bay Street loves debt, and public debt is considered premium debt. Bay Street loves our two fiscal Frankenstein parties because Orwellian wealth creation in Ontario is in high gear since Harris-Flaherty and Pinocchio McGuinty. And then there are the Harpers sinking us further into debt at the national level.
This country's economy should be booming with all of the unparalleled natural resource wealth at their disposal and being exported to other countries sans value-added. But that's not what our corrupt stooges were hired for. No. Because in neoliberal Canada the new business plan is this:
debt = wealth creation. And it is Orwellian. They want to eventually force Canadians into the situation that Greece is experiencing today. They want an international banking cabal to be able to walk in the Canada and scoop-up everything that's worth anything. In the end, banks and foreign capital will own Canada not Canaidans. We are already renters in our own land. But it will get worse, much worse if we don't do something about our fiscal Frankensteins in the two old line parties. They want giving the heave-ho but good.
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:39
#66
Ultimately, the banksters will steal everything that's not nailed down and drain us all dry as hay. People had better disabuse themselves of illusions of benign democracy and prepare to defend against raids against our common assets. The Rating agencies like S&P are with the raiding parties, as is Drummond, Hudak, McGuinty and Horwath if not firmly managed by an aware and motivated citizenry. Which at present is neither.
The Artist Taxi Driver (and vid)
'Democracy Rejects Austerity!'
Wed, 2012-04-25 19:55
#67
Andrea has clout and shouldn't be afraid to use it.
What clout does she have now? Prior to yesterday's vote she [i]had[/i] clout, but she has demonstrated that she is afraid to use it.
Sure glad you and a few others were never at the negotiation table for my union. We would have been on strike every year and would never gained a single thing. Instead by incremental improvement after incremental improvement we had a living wage, good benefits and health and saftey coverage.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:12
#68
Bottom line, there's nothing in this budget for us.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:16
#69
Boom Boom
Are there any votes of confidence on social policy issues coming up in Ontario where the ONDP might have some influence?
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:21
#70
Don't bother, Life. They refuse to tell us what the real consequences of losing an election to the very neoliberal Tories would have produced for the poor and unemployed in Ontario. They have more faith in worstpastthepost than we do, that's for damned sure.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:28
#71
M. Spector
There are plenty of them. But the NDP will have no influence at all unless they are prepared to desert the Koalition government and vote down the Liberal wing (which they aren't).
A month ago, Horwath might have been believed if she had said the NDP would vote against the budget if McGuinty didn't make major concessions. Now, however, nobody would believe her.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:32
#72
Boom Boom
Well, compromising on social policy issues should be easier for McQuinty than on the budget. No?
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:40
#73
I think Hudak wanted an election so as to delay the province's plan to deal with the debt. That would utlimately have aided the bond rating agencies in saying:
Hey look! Political instability and nothing doing on the debt side. Let's lower their credit rating so that Ontario will have to pay more in whopping debt service charges!
debt = wealth creation
It's a surer thing than their neoliberal economies and a lot like shooting fish in a barrel.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:41
#74
M. Spector
Well, compromising on social policy issues should be easier for McQuinty than on the budget. No?
Not if they cost money.
The whole point of the budget was the cutbacks and freezes on social programs. McGuilty vowed he would not give Andrea Horwath another penny in new spending for social programs, and he remained true to his word.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:54
#75
Boom Boom
I'm quite far removed from the situation there, but I'm still wondering how the membership of the ONDP feel about all this. I can't see the membership being happy if Andrea rolls over on any further issues such as social policy where she holds the deciding vote in matters of confidence. If she does, wouldn't there be a caucus revolt or leadership review?
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:54
#76
And [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/ontario/liberal-ndp-budget#comment-1341771]here's what you were voting for[/url], whether you knew it or not. I guess you're OK with that. I suspect a lot of others who voted NDP, however, will be disappointed with our new Liberal-NDP Majority Government™.
The first progressive tax increase since 1993? I'll take it.
Manitoba has had an NDP government for 13 years. Where is our progressive tax increase?
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:54
#77
You'd bankrupt the strike fund in no time. Must be nice to live in this fantasyland bubble that there is no consequences to actions or demands. You can just demand, demand, demand and expect someone else will pay.
Wed, 2012-04-25 20:59
#78
Boom Boom
There's a strike fund? 
Seriously, if the provincial NDP are not prepared to act on behalf of the population - whether it's by being in government, or in holding the balance of power, then what's the fucking point?
Wed, 2012-04-25 21:07
#79
They are doing exactly that Boom Boom. But some expect to get everything in a single negotiation, and life never, ever works that way.
Wed, 2012-04-25 21:19
#80
Manitoba has had an NDP government for 13 years. Where is our progressive tax increase?
And you're stuck with probably the lowest cost of living in the country. What a heck hole is Manitoba.
Elect some Tories or Liberals, and then see what it costs. You'll be sorry guaranteed.
Wed, 2012-04-25 21:39
#81
Ontario hopes deep budget cuts will calm debt markets
This is a budget aimed at pleasing none, except Ontario’s creditors.
When the budget relies on borrowing money (and it's going to for a while, since cutting back by $15 billion in one year would be a disaster), guess whose interests become important to satisfy?
Wed, 2012-04-25 21:52
#82
Ontario hopes deep budget cuts will calm debt markets
This is a budget aimed at pleasing none, except Ontario’s creditors.
When the budget relies on borrowing money (and it's going to for a while, since cutting back by $15 billion in one year would be a disaster), guess whose interests become important to satisfy?
Yes I agree. And creditors love to lend to countries with millions of co-signers to the debt, like Greece. And then a regime for economic medications begins at some point. Next thing we know they will be saying no to a referendum on whether to accept more economic medicine from their excellent friends in banking and finance. Salivating jackals waiting in the wings would just love for them to hack-off pieces of our health care and public infrastructure and have it tossed it to them. When people say there is nothing in this budget for us, I think they may not understand where the neoliberal agenda is headed.
We don't have to be a bankrupt province and country. We don't have to have things run into the ground by fiscal Frankensteins. We don't have to become a larger version of Greece or Ireland down the road. We don't have to march ourselves down this road to serfdom waiting for the perfect revolution to present itself to us on some sunny morn', or that one which will never happen.
Wed, 2012-04-25 21:54
#83
Well, I am part of the NDP membership and I sure didn't want an election. BB, the Liberals are short 1 seat so it's a razor minority. And like others have mentioned, Hudak could have won for just not being the liberals and boy it would have been harris loser years all over again.
In education, it was literally a nightmare. Personally, I think the NDP made a smart move, increase strength and popularity to fight the war in the future and to win. Remember, in the Art of Warfare, war is the last tactic of winning.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:08
#84
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:24
#85
Ontario hopes deep budget cuts will calm debt markets
This is a budget aimed at pleasing none, except Ontario’s creditors.
When the budget relies on borrowing money (and it's going to for a while, since cutting back by $15 billion in one year would be a disaster), guess whose interests become important to satisfy?
..it is my contention that when you see the financial sector and debt as legit you've already lost. austerity is a downward spiral. make cuts = doward pressure on the economy = more cuts. there is no end to this bottomless road to untold misery. this isn't about good polititians bad polititians but allowing the puppet masters to play the political puppets. this also is not just about ont. you need to have some kind of analysis of what is happening globally. the only govs that don't jump to capital demands are some latin american countries and that is because their populations are activated.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:28
#86
I'm going to try your theory and not pay off my loans next month. I am sure the credit union will understand.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:32
#87
..i've tried your theroy of voting ndp for years and find in the end they adopt neoliberal agendas.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:38
#88
That's right paying your bills is soooo neo-liberal. We can discuss all you want about why those bills are there, and I will likely agree with all of them, but the reality is those bills are now there. There are consequences to trying to spend more than is collected, both for workers and for the economy as a whole and not paying those bills. The damage to the most vulnerable in our province would be exponential even compared to this bad budget or the Harris years. Pretending there is no cost to just not paying is positively foolish. Financial responsible government isn't new, even if we haven't had one for some time. Perhaps you should do some reading on what faced Tommy Douglas when the CCF became the government in Sask.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:39
#89
But some expect to get everything in a single negotiation
Maybe so, but no one in these threads.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:48
#90
Yes, Life... ITT "this" and "that" = "everything". [img]http://www.graphicsgrotto.com/emoticons/rolleyes/images/emrolleyes11.gif...
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:49
#91
Oh BS. You have repeatedly claimed that the ONDP should be demanding this and demanding that. As if all you have to do to get something in a negotiation postion is demand it. Try that defender of the working class and see how long your members would put up with the consequence of that approach. In any labour negotiation you have you bottom line and your issues you can live with going back to again next time out. The ONDP obviously had a wealth tax (something that is surprising to win in this climate and against all the odds) and improvements in childcare and social assistance and disability payments. Is it everything they would have liked, no, but are they the best they could likely get at this point, seems so. Anyone who thinks this is the end of the issues the NDP is going to go at is fooling themself.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:51
#92
When your argument is pedantic semantics you've already lost.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:52
#93
That's right paying your bills is soooo neo-liberal. We can discuss all you want about why those bills are there, and I will likely agree with all of them, but the reality is those bills are now there. There are consequences to trying to spend more than is collected, both for workers and for the economy as a whole and not paying those bills. The damage to the most vulnerable in our province would be exponential even compared to this bad budget or the Harris years. Pretending there is no cost to just not paying is positively foolish. Financial responsible government isn't new, even if we haven't had one for some time. Perhaps you should do some reading on what faced Tommy Douglas when the CCF became the government in Sask.
..it is neoliberal when the debt gets privatized and the population pays many times over. it is neoliberalism when the debt gets paid on the back of the 99% when in fact it is the 1% who benefited most from that debt. what i suggest is there are alternatives than just playing the game of we need to pay off the debt accumulation. an example is that dextor did not have to choose the austerity road. i suggest in the end he had no choice because the ideology of the ndp doesn't challenge the root of the problem which is capitalism.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:54
#94
When your argument is pedantic semantics you've already lost.
..are you refering to my post?
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:55
#95
That's right paying your bills is soooo neo-liberal. We can discuss all you want about why those bills are there, and I will likely agree with all of them, but the reality is those bills are now there. There are consequences to trying to spend more than is collected, both for workers and for the economy as a whole and not paying those bills. The damage to the most vulnerable in our province would be exponential even compared to this bad budget or the Harris years. Pretending there is no cost to just not paying is positively foolish. Financial responsible government isn't new, even if we haven't had one for some time. Perhaps you should do some reading on what faced Tommy Douglas when the CCF became the government in Sask.
..it is neoliberal when the debt gets privatized and the population pays many times over. it is neoliberalism when the debt gets paid on the back of the 99% when in fact it is the 1% who benefited most from that debt. what i suggest is there are alternatives than just playing the game of we need to pay off the debt. an example is that dextor did not have to choose the austerity road. i suggest in the end he had no choice because the ideology of the ndp doesn't challenge the root of the problem which is capitalism.
The debt is always going to be privatized. That is how debt works. The public does not have the ability to 'lend' money to a government. And no the 1% is not the only ones who have benefited from that debt. Unless of course you plan on never using a road, transit, health care, go to school or any of the other services and needs a modern government provides. You can't just print money and expect to have a health economy. Your thinking is what drives most average people away from progressive politics. They know in the end they are the ones who will have to pay no matter what your classroom model suggests.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:55
#96
No, that would be when you have to resort to lying about what the other person is saying.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:57
#97
When your argument is pedantic semantics you've already lost.
..are you refering to my post?
No the one above yours. Yours just got in the way. I think you are totally wrong, but at least your arguments have substance and some kernals of truth mixed in.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:57
#98
And like others have mentioned, Hudak could have won for just not being the liberals and boy it would have been harris loser years all over again.
Wouldn't it be nice, sometime, if the NDP could win for "just not being the liberals"? Of course, to do that, the NDP would have to not be the liberals.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:58
#99
..i've tried your theroy of voting ndp for years and find in the end they adopt neoliberal agendas.
[sarcasm]That's because the handful few NDP governments we have had tend to force neoliberalism on Ottawa and the rest of Canada. I think Isaac Newton first observed this trickle-up phenomenon which tends to defy gravity.[/theCounterLeg-Pull]
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:59
#100
No, that would be when you have to resort to lying about what the other person is saying.
Grow up, you sound like you are 12 years old. Although that isn't fair because I know lots of 12 year olds that would provide much more substance.
Wed, 2012-04-25 22:59
#101
That's right paying your bills is soooo neo-liberal. We can discuss all you want about why those bills are there, and I will likely agree with all of them, but the reality is those bills are now there. There are consequences to trying to spend more than is collected, both for workers and for the economy as a whole and not paying those bills. The damage to the most vulnerable in our province would be exponential even compared to this bad budget or the Harris years. Pretending there is no cost to just not paying is positively foolish. Financial responsible government isn't new, even if we haven't had one for some time. Perhaps you should do some reading on what faced Tommy Douglas when the CCF became the government in Sask.
..it is neoliberal when the debt gets privatized and the population pays many times over. it is neoliberalism when the debt gets paid on the back of the 99% when in fact it is the 1% who benefited most from that debt. what i suggest is there are alternatives than just playing the game of we need to pay off the debt. an example is that dextor did not have to choose the austerity road. i suggest in the end he had no choice because the ideology of the ndp doesn't challenge the root of the problem which is capitalism.
The debt is always going to be privatized. That is how debt works. The public does not have the ability to 'lend' money to a government. And no the 1% is not the only ones who have benefited from that debt. Unless of course you plan on never using a road, transit, health care, go to school or any of the other services and needs a modern government provides. You can't just print money and expect to have a health economy. Your thinking is what drives most average people away from progressive politics. They know in the end they are the ones who will have to pay no matter what your classroom model suggests.
..that's not true about debts. there was a time when canadians lent money to each other. it was lent by using pension funds etc. i didn't say that no one else benefited just that the 1% benefited most.