Now that the 2011 election is over, let's use this thread to discuss Canadian politics as they transpire over the next 4 years.
Please keep the discussion civil and I kindly request no personal attacks or insults directed towards fellow ehMac members.
It would be refreshing to avoid over-the-top hyperbole as well. We're all Canadians and lets not make people out to be left-wing or right-wing caricatures or turn things into a WWE fight promo.
I may not be a supporter of Prime Minster Harper, but he does endorse ehMac.ca.
^ Picture I took on a nice trip to Ottawa this past winter.
No way of knowing without looking at the books… but it's a start. The funny thing about balancing budgets is that it's usually the culmination of many smaller things that help bring about one big change.
What the government needs to learn is that when you control the small things, you won't need to rely on, for example, a big solution (stealing billions from your employees) to balance the books.
No way of knowing without looking at the books… but it's a start. The funny thing about balancing budgets is that it's usually the culmination of many smaller things that help bring about one big change.
What the government needs to learn is that when you control the small things, you won't need to rely on, for example, a big solution (stealing billions from your employees) to balance the books.
Yes, this happen everywhere including in business. The problem is how do you deal with it. Much like in the private sector this problem may always exist. This is because strategies created to deal with this has been less than 100% effective, as other problems crop up.
Indiscriminate slashing of budgets and employees are ineffective at dealing with the underlying issues. Such as the problem mentioned above, or over staffing as they hurt departments being ran efficiently or currently understaffed.
i agree. departments (in the private and public sector) look to spend whatever is left in their budget each year because they know if they don't then their budget will get slashed in the following year when they may actually need that money. a better system would be to reward departments who come in under budget, or at the very least not punish them for it by slashing their budget.
the idea that you can just indiscriminately cut 5-10% across the board and not see a drop in service is naive. i'm not saying there's no fat to be trimmed, but it's not as easy as saying "slash & burn!".
Of course it's vague… I'm neither inclined, nor knowledgable enough to go into the minutia. It's not my job, nor my responsibility. I make sure I pay my bills on time and have enough money to live.
Look, the mindset has to change. If you don't fix the problems that led you to where you are in the first place, you'll just go in circles.
Right On! Dr.G. It's about time someone took on the Nannies of this country.
I glad you pointed out that Our Glorious Leader is focusing his spending on convicts and if some money falls off the table into the hands of the Private Sector praise be onto the Entrepreneur, so be it.
Money to feed Nanny's cat is such a waste. Cut em back till they really scream then give em enough to shut them up should be about right.
Well, some big bucks had better fall off of the table for the corporate tax cuts or there will be a day of reckoning comes Oct., 2015.
As for Nanny and the cats, better she get rid of the cats and use the cat food as a source of protein for herself. We don't want her getting sick and clogging up the health clinics.
Better still, let the clinics do what they do best, and set up private health clinics/spas/retreats for those who are able to pay for quality service. They might even make a profit??? We shall see.
What the government needs to learn is that when you control the small things, you won't need to rely on, for example, a big solution (stealing billions from your employees) to balance the books.
Actually, no. The elected officials are don't and shouldn't be micro-managing the public service, much like a board of directors doesn't manage the day to day operations of a firm. While they should try to implement strategies and procedures to cut waste, if our government spend all of its time focusing on the little things, it will miss the big things.
i agree. departments (in the private and public sector) look to spend whatever is left in their budget each year because they know if they don't then their budget will get slashed in the following year when they may actually need that money. a better system would be to reward departments who come in under budget, or at the very least non punish them for it by slashing their budget.
the idea that you can just indiscriminately cut 5-10% across the board and not see a drop in service is naive. i'm not saying there's no fat to be trimmed, but it's not as easy as saying "slash & burn!".
Yep, this is what I was talking about. Fat can be trimmed, but you don't need to use a machete to do it. With this said, i do think that there needs to be an ongoing restructuring of the departments to reduce some of the waste, and you don't even have to screw over the public service employees to do it either.
The only problem with the reward system is that you will have some managers over inflating their budget requests to get a reward. And if they scrimped and saved they may not get the same budget again next year.
So were is the smaller government?
Where is the reform movement.....
Youngest MP just one victory away from a sweet pension
NDP candidate Pierre-Luc Dusseault is shown in an NDP handout photo. Dusseault, a 19-year-old student of applied politics at the Universite de Sherbrooke, now becomes the youngest member of Parliament in Canadian history, according to the House of Commons website.
NDP candidate Pierre-Luc Dusseault is shown in an NDP handout photo. Dusseault, a 19-year-old student of applied politics at the Universite de Sherbrooke, now becomes the youngest member of Parliament in Canadian history, according to the House of Commons website.
THE CANADIAN PRESS
By Kenyon Wallace | 9 minutes ago
He’s not even finished university yet, but he’s already on track to retire head and shoulders above most Canadians.
At 19, Pierre-Luc Dusseault became Canada’s youngest ever MP this week when he was elected as a member of the New Democratic Party in the riding of Sherbrooke.
Now, in addition to his $157,731 annual salary, he’ll qualify for a pension of nearly $30,000 a year if he remains in Parliament for just six years.
That means Dusseault and his fellow rookies — many of the NDP’s newly elected MPs are under 30 — only have to win one more election before their pensions are virtually guaranteed.
And while they won’t be able to start collecting their pensions until age 55, they’ll be better off than most of the people they represent.
Only about 30 per cent of Canadians have employer-sponsored pensions, and only some of those are defined-benefit plans. According to Service Canada, the average annual pension administered by the Canadian Pension Plan is just over $6,000.
The quote you supplied is kind of Age-ist don't you think. What difference does it make whether he is 19 or 50? If he is doing the same job, probably back-benching, should he not get compensated the same as anyone else?
On a side note, putting down elected representative of parliament may not necessarily be a way to win over future employers, not to mention many other reasons for the level of compensation. It can't be expected that they would do it for free either? The problem I have is the rate at which pay increases are dolled out, it should be pegged to inflation.
Of course it's vague… I'm neither inclined, nor knowledgable enough to go into the minutia. It's not my job, nor my responsibility. I make sure I pay my bills on time and have enough money to live.
Look, the mindset has to change. If you don't fix the problems that led you to where you are in the first place, you'll just go in circles.
Sooooo close ehMax. All you needed to do was tuck in that thumb, angle your hand up a couple of inches, move your elbow back a few inches and then forcefully drive that fist forward -- and you would have been my hero! beejacon
Radical is relative. He just needs to balance things a touch by eliminating some of the radical programs enacted by previous socialist governments -- like universal health care.
Radical is relative. He just needs to balance things a touch by eliminating some of the radical programs enacted by previous socialist governments -- like universal health care.
Oh I fully believe Harper won't go after health care. At least not directly. Even with a majority, it's too politically dangerous.
What he will do is what Chretien and Martin did in the 90s and just amp that up. The key is leaving room for the provinces to cut their health budgets and not go after them with the Canada Health Act when they experiment with various two tier solutions. Death by a thousand cuts so to speak. But he'll be able to say that the erosion of universality wasn't his doing.
Oh I fully believe Harper won't go after health care. At least not directly. Even with a majority, it's too politically dangerous.
What he will do is what Chretien and Martin did in the 90s and just amp that up. The key is leaving room for the provinces to cut their health budgets and not go after them with the Canada Health Act when they experiment with various two tier solutions. Death by a thousand cuts so to speak. But he'll be able to say that the erosion of universality wasn't his doing.
Oh I fully believe Harper won't go after health care. At least not directly. Even with a majority, it's too politically dangerous.
What he will do is what Chretien and Martin did in the 90s and just amp that up. The key is leaving room for the provinces to cut their health budgets and not go after them with the Canada Health Act when they experiment with various two tier solutions. Death by a thousand cuts so to speak. But he'll be able to say that the erosion of universality wasn't his doing.
this was sort of what I was thinking when Flaherty was going across the country selling the provinces on his HST deal. More revenue at the provincial level, = look we're cutting taxes at the federal level!
Assuming the economy does well and Harper keeps things on track, I think his hopes for re-election look quite strong at this point. But, that's only a day in.
A few macrotrends in the Conservatives favour:
- Quebec - With only a small number of seats in Quebec, the Conservatives have little to lose by this fickle electorate.
- Atlantic Canada - The Conservatives did well here and voters in the Atlantic tend to be quite reliable
- Census Update of Seats - BC and Alberta will receive a bunch of new ridings in the next election, which are likely to mostly go Conservative.
- Liberal Party implosion - The Liberals can't rebuilt their party by the next election. They are broke and finances are not likely to improve. The Liberals are best to stick with the existing seats and build outwards and not focus on the whole country.
- Green Party - With a seat in Parliament, the Green Party will be far more visible next election. I think their support base will go up a few points, which mostly drains votes from NDP and Liberals.
- Loyal Supporters - The Conservatives have scored some very consistent numbers for the last 3 to 4 elections and their support base stands behind Harper. I think that's unlikely to change.
At this point in time, I think Harper is in a really good position.
Assuming the economy does well and Harper keeps things on track, I think his hopes for re-election look quite strong at this point. But, that's only a day in.
A few macrotrends in the Conservatives favour:
- Quebec - With only a small number of seats in Quebec, the Conservatives have little to lose by this fickle electorate.
- Atlantic Canada - The Conservatives did well here and voters in the Atlantic tend to be quite reliable
- Census Update of Seats - BC and Alberta will receive a bunch of new ridings in the next election, which are likely to mostly go Conservative.
- Liberal Party implosion - The Liberals can't rebuilt their party by the next election. They are broke and finances are not likely to improve. The Liberals are best to stick with the existing seats and build outwards and not focus on the whole country.
- Green Party - With a seat in Parliament, the Green Party will be far more visible next election. I think their support base will go up a few points, which mostly drains votes from NDP and Liberals.
- Loyal Supporters - The Conservatives have scored some very consistent numbers for the last 3 to 4 elections and their support base stands behind Harper. I think that's unlikely to change.
At this point in time, I think Harper is in a really good position.
Way too early to even speculate on 2015, .... but here goes.
- Harper's vote total only went up by a point and half this election, but because of vote splitting, primarily in Ontario, he was able to garner 24 more seats out of that tiny increase. If Layton does a good job in the next four years it's quite possible that vote splitting will not be as big a factor next time out. If the Liberals don't resurrect themselves (and that will be difficult for them) and even 10% of the 60% who didn't vote for the Cons decides to back the non-Con frontrunner, the NDP will be the first past the post beneficiary. Harper better start early with the character assassination TV ads.
- There has been no government leader in history who has not eventually worn out their welcome with the public. In 2015 Harper will have been PM for an awfully long time. Even if he manages to get through the next 4 years without power-mongers and hacks within his government succumbing to greed and causing scandal, I suspect his brand will be looking more than a little shopworn by that time.
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac
1.5M posts
40.3K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Canadian Mac owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about collections, iOS, models, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!