So I'm sure many of you have heard the news by now that Parliament will be dissolved and we'll be having a spring election.
Generally I don't bring up politics but this sucks
We are stuck in a loop. I think the ability to dissolve a none functioning government is important however with no strong party as a choice we could be stuck in minority mode again.
Being held in contempt of court was historic, though. Even if the committee that first suggested it had more opposition members than government members.
I doubt that any of the other parties will do any better, however the current government was happily spending money on things to make itself look good, like all the Economic Action Plan ads and the whole change to the Harper Government on letterhead.
Yeah, I just hope harper gets booted permanently.
sure, why not replace one arrogant eog-centric unaccountable elitist for another one? Party doesn't matter, neither do promises made, since the System prevents any real change away from increasing control and draining of the Average Jo's wallet and emotional resources.
Quote from: Darren Dirt on March 25, 2011, 04:35:35 PM
sure, why not replace one arrogant eog-centric unaccountable elitist for another one? Party doesn't matter, neither do promises made, since the System prevents any real change away from increasing control and draining of the Average Jo's wallet and emotional resources.
Eventually people will get upset enough to do something. Also, based on random chance we might end up with a half decent government if we have enough elections.
Quote from: Tom on March 25, 2011, 04:37:54 PM
Quote from: Darren Dirt on March 25, 2011, 04:35:35 PM
sure, why not replace one arrogant eog-centric unaccountable elitist for another one? Party doesn't matter, neither do promises made, since the System prevents any real change away from increasing control and draining of the Average Jo's wallet and emotional resources.
Eventually people will get upset enough to do something. Also, based on random chance we might end up with a half decent government if we have enough elections.
Or just go deeper into debt, elections are very costly.
Well, I bet Harper won't be elected again. Honestly, too many mistakes he made!
Quote from: Lazybones on March 25, 2011, 06:14:31 PM
Quote from: Tom on March 25, 2011, 04:37:54 PM
Quote from: Darren Dirt on March 25, 2011, 04:35:35 PM
sure, why not replace one arrogant eog-centric unaccountable elitist for another one? Party doesn't matter, neither do promises made, since the System prevents any real change away from increasing control and draining of the Average Jo's wallet and emotional resources.
Eventually people will get upset enough to do something. Also, based on random chance we might end up with a half decent government if we have enough elections.
Or just go deeper into debt, elections are very costly.
Well that is one more reason for more people to get upset enough to start caring about politics and elections more.
Going backwards to when I first immigrated: I don't like Stephen Harper (5 years 1 month so far), I liked Paul Martin (2 years 3 months), I didn't like Jean Chretien (10 years 1 month), I didn't like Kim Campbell (5 months), I didn't like Brian Mulroney (6 years 9 months). So out of the last 24 years and 7 months, I've liked 2 years and 3 months worth of leadership. 27 months out of 295 months total. Too bad Paul Martin inherited all of Chretien's turds (err, "legacy"), and then got destroyed over it.
I doubt I'll like Michael Ignatieff or Jack Layton or Gilles Duceppe any better. Really, they're all the same low-level scum trying to increase their own powerbase with no regard for the average Canadian.
Such is the sad state of Canadian politics - they're all following the scandal-ridden examples to the south, and they're happily working at building up walls rather than working together to keep the country running smooth.
Something that might be more interesting: a discussion on how politics are divided on various political spectrums: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum
Yes, regarding the cost of a sparked election in a very tight budgetary year is somewhat ironic, given this row was more or less sparked by the other parties rejecting the budget, kind of reminds me of the 2008 prorogue.
I hate elections where I have to pick the least crappy option (again), but that's Canada.
Quote from: Mr. Analog on March 25, 2011, 10:38:38 PM
Yes, regarding the cost of a sparked election in a very tight budgetary year is somewhat ironic, given this row was more or less sparked by the other parties rejecting the budget, kind of reminds me of the 2008 prorogue.
I hate elections where I have to pick the least crappy option (again), but that's Canada.
Is there even a least crappy option?
Quote from: Lazybones on March 25, 2011, 11:15:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Analog on March 25, 2011, 10:38:38 PM
Yes, regarding the cost of a sparked election in a very tight budgetary year is somewhat ironic, given this row was more or less sparked by the other parties rejecting the budget, kind of reminds me of the 2008 prorogue.
I hate elections where I have to pick the least crappy option (again), but that's Canada.
Is there even a least crappy option?
Pirate Party? I know a few people who are part of it.
Quote from: Lazybones on March 25, 2011, 11:15:04 PM
Quote from: Mr. Analog on March 25, 2011, 10:38:38 PM
Yes, regarding the cost of a sparked election in a very tight budgetary year is somewhat ironic, given this row was more or less sparked by the other parties rejecting the budget, kind of reminds me of the 2008 prorogue.
I hate elections where I have to pick the least crappy option (again), but that's Canada.
Is there even a least crappy option?
I don't know, there are layers of suckitude:
-Conservatives (suck)
-Liberals (suck more)
-NDP (sweet zombie jesus)
-Bloc (you might as well vote for a party in another country)
Quote from: Thorin on March 25, 2011, 08:58:21 PM
Something that might be more interesting: a discussion on how politics are divided on various political spectrums: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum
Carlin said it best...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
the historical math proves the impossibility of these emotion-triggering egomaniacs actually "representing" the majority of people anyway ... let alone "all people".
Man, I wish the election was sooner so we could get this all over and done with and not have to sit through a month of hot air escaping the vaporous gasbags unleashed from Ottawa on the unsuspecting masses.
Hey! If you live in Edmonton Central there is a Pirate Party candidate!
If we all vote for one party (the country) we can get back a Majority Government and not have to deal with this BS again for a while. But alas I think we'll see another Minority and not much else...
Silly no confidence because we don't like you... at least that is what it seems to be IMO.
Well, I see either a minority Gov't again (bleh) or (despite Iggy's comments over the weekend) a coalition Gov't (scary)
I'd like to see a strong majority, but I doubt that will happen.
Sure, Melbosa, just vote for the one I want in power, 'k?
The problem is that many people want to see a majority Conservative government, while many other people want to see a majority Liberal government, while quite a few want to see a majority NDP or Bloc Quebecois government. We are a nation divided as to who we'd like in power. At least, the minority of us who bother voting.
Voting for the party is stupid anyhow. Vote for what you'd see like done, and the person who might actually vote in that direction. If you vote conservative, you'll probably almost never see your representative vote the way you'd like them to vote (that is if you disagree with any of the conservative party's past actions) because the party has a strict conformance policy, vote against it and you're booted.
So yeah. Its a load of bull and too many people are voting idiotically.
I've lived in an NDP province, still one of the few left in the country, and I can tell you, even at a socialist view, your representation personally isn't really felt. You want to be represented properly, you're going to have to run for office yourself.
And yeah Thorin, I know, it is a pipe dream to think any populace would collectively vote one way. I know... but I can dream!
Oh yeah, Mack tweeted this today:
federal election races to watch in edmonton. http://bit.ly/hrfBfX
Pretty good roundup IMHO (though not without editorializing in some parts)
I agree with what you say, Melbosa, politicians don't vote their conscience, they vote their party line - regardless of party. There's too much power in aligning yourself with a party, and politicians are rewarded for accumulating power, not for representing their constituents. How? By getting into the old boys' club, where they get connections that ensure they're always comfortable and well-off after political life.
And I have no idea how to counter that problem.
Tom, when the Liberals were in power, they also always voted along party lines. Just think back to the two years under Paul Martin and the ten years under Chretien. The only difference in my view was that I actually _liked_ the programs Paul Martin was pursuing. We still pay more taxes now than we would have if Paul Martin's tax changes hadn't been rolled back by the Conservatives. He had proposed major increases in the personal tax deduction, increasing deductability of child care, and increasing the GST credit. All these changes decreased how much low- to middle-income earners would pay while living the taxes on high-income earners the same. When the Conservatives had him defeated in a vote of no confidence and then gained power, they rolled back his changes, and instead brought in a deduction in the GST and a new taxable payment for families with young children. Turns out these changes help high-income earners more than low- and middle-income earners. But hey, the Conservatives keep _claiming_ they lowered taxes, so it must be true, right?
And for those of you who don't believe me, look back through the old business payroll packages, where they list proposed changes in tax rates, non-refundable credits, and the like. We went from 16% to 15% (proposed) under Martin, then that suddenly got yanked and we got put back up to 16% for a few months, and then it got dropped back down to 15.5% (what the Conservatives called "a significant personal income tax reduction", even though it was actually an _increase_ over what had already been proposed in Martin's budget).
We need to fix this first-past-the-post system, too, to reflect when a candidate only has 50.00001% of those who bothered to vote voting for them. We would get _much_ better representation if they only got as much power as they did votes, especially so if the runner-up got a seat as well. Of course, that would lead to a doubling of the number of MPs, unless the boundaries were significantly re-drawn.
Ahh, serious change. Never gonna happen!
I think another big problem that we as Canadians have to tackle is voter apathy.
How many people went to the polls during the last election?