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.
Yeah the Liberals are always demanding the rich pay more taxes. They are broken records in that way.
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.
I don't know when you think this mythical time was, but it wasn't in the last two centuries. The difference is that deficit financing was done in the past for things like wars and disasters, but even then private finance was involved to some extent. It is only in the post war era when much larger deficit financing occurred and almost all of that, with the exception of bond issuances and things like that, was done through private finances. There has never been a time when governments funded programs and activities on the backs of pension plans, particularly private sector pension plans. At least not in the direct way you are suggesting. Yes they have raided and buggered up pension plans, but not used it to cover program spending by governments.
The real problem is that successive governments have tried to cut their own incomes (through ill-advised tax cuts and de-regulation) and increased spending. At some point something has to give and we are getting to that point. Tommy Douglas recognized long ago that the best way to get from under the financiers is to get rid of debt so that you can do things like eventually bring in universal health care. We have had decades of financially irresponible governments. That is whay has put us in this postion. Today the most progressive way forward is get rid of the debt and tell the financiers to go screw themselves afterwards.
..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.
Agreed! Except that debt that is not owed by government to themselves is, 10 chances to 1, debt owed to private sources at exorbitant rates of interest.
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.
So you're saying on one hand that debts owed to the 1% are bad debts, but Dexter's NDP is evil for not wanting more debt owed to private sources at exorbitant rates of interest. I don't get it. You've totally lost me here.
..i have better sources than this but i've got to dig them up. have no time right now gotta go but i'll be back.
quote:
Through our publicly owned Bank of Canada, which was established in 1935, the federal government has the power to borrow money in huge quantities essentially interest-free, and to make such funds available not only for its own use, but also for provincial and municipal expenditures. Such borrowing helped Canada to get out of the Great Depression, and to finance its participation in World War II. Continuance of this practice until about 1975 played a key role in creating Canada's post-war prosperity and in making possible its social programs.
http://actionparty.ca/news/monetary-reform/call-for-renaisssance-of-the-...
..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.Agreed! Except that debt that is not owed by government to themselves is, 10 chances to 1, debt owed to private sources at exorbitant rates of interest.
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.
So you're saying on one hand that debts owed to the 1% are bad debts, but Dexter's NDP is evil for not wanting more debt owed to private sources at exorbitant rates of interest. I don't get it. You've totally lost me here.
..i said dextor did not have to choose austerity but in the end did because the ndp ideology doesn't challenge the root of the problem which is capitalism.
..i have better sources than this but i've got to dig them up. have no time right now gotta go but i'll be back.
quote:
Through our publicly owned Bank of Canada, which was established in 1935, the federal government has the power to borrow money in huge quantities essentially interest-free, and to make such funds available not only for its own use, but also for provincial and municipal expenditures. Such borrowing helped Canada to get out of the Great Depression, and to finance its participation in World War II. Continuance of this practice until about 1975 played a key role in creating Canada's post-war prosperity and in making possible its social programs.
http://actionparty.ca/news/monetary-reform/call-for-renaisssance-of-the-...
That's great! Now all we have to do is convince the feds to use the Bank of Canada to finance social spending and infrastructure in Ontario and Nova Scotia.
And until then, Nova Scotia has no alternative but to raise the provincial corporate tax rate and drive industries and jobs to neighboring provinces in the neoliberal set up orchestrated by Ottawa.
If Ottawa would collect overall tax revs at just the OECD average rate as a percentage of GDP, $35 billion more revenue every year for social spending and infrastructure. And that's not even the OECD high-end rate. And never mind the EU-15 average rate. And just forget about the social dems' Nordic country average rate. Because that would be Soviet communism compared to what we have today in Ottawa.
NDPP..i have better sources than this but i've got to dig them up. have no time right now gotta go but i'll be back.
quote:
Through our publicly owned Bank of Canada, which was established in 1935, the federal government has the power to borrow money in huge quantities essentially interest-free, and to make such funds available not only for its own use, but also for provincial and municipal expenditures. Such borrowing helped Canada to get out of the Great Depression, and to finance its participation in World War II. Continuance of this practice until about 1975 played a key role in creating Canada's post-war prosperity and in making possible its social programs.
http://actionparty.ca/news/monetary-reform/call-for-renaisssance-of-the-...
That's great! Now all we have to do is convince the feds to use the Bank of Canada to finance social spending and infrastructure in Ontario and Nova Scotia.
the present Governor Mark Carney probably isn't up to it either...
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.
Hey, fuck off with the personal attacks. I've read your posts. There's nothing less substantial to my posts than yours or anyone else's. Unlike you, I haven't attacked you, and I haven't lied about your position. I'm not a child. Deal with it.
And if my posts don't measure up to your exacting standards, don't read them.
Just suppose for a moment that Ontario still had a majority Liberal government and it came out with exactly the budget that was just passed by the Legislature.
Now, can you imagine all these loyal NDP supporters tying themselves into logical knots to justify - and indeed crow over - the passing of such a budget?
And yet here we are.
Bingo!
CFL
