Federal Election 2008 Thread - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Federal Election 2008 Thread
Pages (16): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 »

Posted by Skipper on Oct-10-2008 01:04:

quote:
Originally posted by DigiNut
Did he bite the head off first or eat it whole? Because it would be totally awesome of he bit the head off. RARRRR, HERE KITTY KITTY *fthhhp!*

He probably gave taxpayer money to an animal shelter afterwards.

Posted by DigiNut on Oct-10-2008 01:26:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
He probably gave taxpayer money to an animal shelter afterwards.

Do they have animal shelters for headless kittens?

Posted by hardcore trancer on Oct-10-2008 02:58:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
well, the gap is closing. Harris/Decima said 4% separates the CPC and Liberals?

this could be interesting. If enough NDP and Green supporters reconsider and vote Liberal, Dion could pull this off.

A Liberal minority that required support of either the NDP or Bloc (and a good faith effort by them to work together) to have a majority be my preferred outcome.

Oh Iam sooo hoping for this and it could realistically turn out this way from the way things are going now.

Posted by MarkT on Oct-10-2008 03:08:

read the news now, lol.

the CPC "cling to power" has officially begun.

Harper is stepping up the "Dion is not worth the risk" to "how does 'Prime Minister Dion' sound"?

so Dion apparently fucked up an interview pretty good in which he didn't understand the subjunctive question posed to him. They did 3-4 takes and naturally were asked not to air the goofed part...but an affiliate aired the entire interview which is apparently pretty comical and makes Dion look rather confused and unpolished.

Harper and his people pulled a TV into a hotel lobby, delayed a flight, and played it for the media present as evidence that Dion is unfit to lead the country.

lol...desperate?

edit: wow...here is. total non-story.

THe interviewer is an idiot. Dion asked a *perfectly legitimate* qualifier to clarify WHEN the interviewer is suggesting Dion would have been PM. yes, it's a hypothetical, but you have to consider the timeframe of being in power, retard.

if Dion had been in power all this time or if he was elected now, OBVIOUSLY there's a difference in how he would handle the current crisis. There's a difference between having your economic agenda in place 2.5 years ago and encountering it, taking over 2 months ago, or being elected now and dealing with it. That's all Dion was asking.

what a sham of a 'story', lol.

Posted by Master Kush on Oct-10-2008 03:43:

LOL can't beleive you're defending Dion on this. If he can't understand a simple question that any 10 year old could, then he shouldn't be representing our country.

It's embarassing that this guy is the leader of the Liberal's.

Posted by hardcore trancer on Oct-10-2008 04:22:

Lets see how low and dirty Harper will go to get more votes this election.His pals in the south are very desperate right now.Looks like he is in the same position up here too.

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 11:41:

quote:
Originally posted by Master Kush
LOL can't beleive you're defending Dion on this. If he can't understand a simple question that any 10 year old could, then he shouldn't be representing our country.

Sorry but this whole thing tells us that Steve Harvey can't ask a question rather then Dion can't answer one.

Harvey starts with a big preamble in the present tense then asks "if you were prime minister today" (present tense) "what would you have done" (past tense) " that Steven harper has not done" (tense uncertain). What is he asking? Is he asking "if you were prime minister today what would you be doing now that Stephen Harper is not?" or is he asking "if you were prime minister at some point in the past what would you have done in order to prevent this crisis that Stephen Harper did not do?" The question as phrased did not make sense... essentially he's asking "if you became prime minister today what would you have done at some unspecified point in the past that the guy who was prime minister yesterday didn't do?"

I think it's perfectly legitimate that Dion asked for clarification. What really drives home the point that Harvey messed up in asking the question is when Dion asks "if I were prime minister two and a half years ago?" and Harvey says "no, if you were prime minister today" then the staffer (producer or writer I presume) later says "if you had been prime minister when Stephen Harper became prime minister," a direct contradiction of Harvey. The change in tense from present to past to uncertain confused Harvey so much that he doesn't even understand what he's asking.

Posted by StereoPrincess on Oct-10-2008 11:57:

quote:
Originally posted by smuncky

i don't know about you guys but that looks terribly awkward and i am scared for that kitteh!

Posted by StereoPrincess on Oct-10-2008 11:59:

quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry but this whole thing tells us that Steve Harvey can't ask a question rather then Dion can't answer one.

Harvey starts with a big preamble in the present tense then asks "if you were prime minister today" (present tense) "what would you have done" (past tense) " that Steven harper has not done" (tense uncertain). What is he asking? Is he asking "if you were prime minister today what would you be doing now that Stephen Harper is not?" or is he asking "if you were prime minister at some point in the past what would you have done in order to prevent this crisis that Stephen Harper did not do?" The question as phrased did not make sense... essentially he's asking "if you became prime minister today what would you have done at some unspecified point in the past that the guy who was prime minister yesterday didn't do?"

I think it's perfectly legitimate that Dion asked for clarification. What really drives home the point that Harvey messed up in asking the question is when Dion asks "if I were prime minister two and a half years ago?" and Harvey says "no, if you were prime minister today" then the staffer (producer or writer I presume) later says "if you had been prime minister when Stephen Harper became prime minister," a direct contradiction of Harvey. The change in tense from present to past to uncertain confused Harvey so much that he doesn't even understand what he's asking.

i think most canadians are smart enough to figure out this. (well minus 1 now )

Posted by exstasie on Oct-10-2008 12:05:

quote:
Originally posted by hardcore trancer
Lets see how low and dirty Harper will go to get more votes this election.His pals in the south are very desperate right now.Looks like he is in the same position up here too.

Why not start with this?

September employment soars unexpectedly

quote:

Finally, a piece of good news: Canadian employers created a blockbuster 107,000 new jobs in September, mainly part-time.

The employment numbers blew away market forecasts, although the unemployment rate remained unchanged at 6.1 per cent.

Economists had been expecting a small increase in the number of new jobs, of about 8,000, after a modest 15,000 increase in August. They had also forecast a slight rise in the unemployment rate to 6.2 per cent from August's 6.1 per cent

...

The health care hiring erases job losses over the last three months. Employment in the sector is now 2.8 per cent higher than nine months ago.

Manufacturing employment increased by 20,000, putting the number of jobs in the troubled sector at the same level as it was at the end of last year, Statscan said.

...

ationally, wages surged as well, in September. The average hourly wage was 4.6 per cent higher in September than a year ago, far outpacing the recent 3.5 per cent increase in inflation. The strongest wage growth was found among youth and older workers, Statscan said.

Overall, the job creation was broadly based, with 46,000 new jobs in the goods side of the economy, and 61,000 jobs in services.

Young people fared particularly well in September. Employers hired an additional 45,000 people aged 15 to 24 in the month. Workers aged 55 and older found 41,000 new jobs.

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/ser...y/Business/home

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 12:21:

quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
i think most canadians are smart enough to figure out this. (well minus 1 now )

Sadly, I think most Canadians won't ever hear/see the actual exchange; rather, they will simply hear that Dion had to restart an interview because he didn't understand the question. That said, this will really only bolster the positions of people who feel Dion is unfit to lead because his English is not strong enough... those people had made up their minds 22 months ago.

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 12:25:

quote:
Originally posted by exstasie
September employment soars unexpectedly

While it sounds like good news I always wonder how many of those new part time jobs are actually just two part time jobs replacing a full time job that has been lost. I have 27 employees... if I replaced those 27 full time people with 54 part-time people I would have "created" 27 new jobs. So how many of these "new" jobs are actually employers replacing students who were working full time in the summer with a number of students now working part time?

Posted by exstasie on Oct-10-2008 12:29:

quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
While it sounds like good news I always wonder how many of those new part time jobs are actually just two part time jobs replacing a full time job that has been lost. I have 27 employees... if I replaced those 27 full time people with 54 part-time people I would have "created" 27 new jobs. So how many of these "new" jobs are actually employers replacing students who were working full time in the summer with a number of students now working part time?

I agree, those 54 part-time positions most likely 'create' 27 new jobs.

But you have to think of it in terms of individuals. There are 27 'new' individuals who now have jobs. Though, some of those 27 individuals might already have a part-time job.

I'm curious how many new individuals have entered the labour force vs. new jobs 'created'.

It is still a positive as it seems that there are quite a few unemployed individuals who are now working, even if it is just part-time.

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 12:39:

quote:
Originally posted by exstasie
I agree, those 54 part-time positions most likely 'create' 27 new jobs.

But you have to think of it in terms of individuals. There are 27 'new' individuals who now have jobs.

There are also 27 people earning approximately half what they were before, with no benefits.

Ultimately, the economy is growing so jobs are created; however, those numbers are misleading as the economy is not growing at such a pace as to account for that many "new" jobs.

Posted by ChemEnhanced on Oct-10-2008 12:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
There are also 27 people earning approximately half what they were before, with no benefits.

Ultimately, the economy is growing so jobs are created; however, those numbers are misleading as the economy is not growing at such a pace as to account for that many "new" jobs.

What's important is what you said earlier....that most of these new jobs are replacement jobs for people going to university. Many students have either found new jobs in new cities or have had to cut hours and the employer has to hire new employees to fill those hours. Its not uncommon for a spike in part time employment in September.

Posted by StereoPrincess on Oct-10-2008 13:20:

quote:
Originally posted by exstasie
I agree, those 54 part-time positions most likely 'create' 27 new jobs.

But you have to think of it in terms of individuals. There are 27 'new' individuals who now have jobs. Though, some of those 27 individuals might already have a part-time job.

I'm curious how many new individuals have entered the labour force vs. new jobs 'created'.

It is still a positive as it seems that there are quite a few unemployed individuals who are now working, even if it is just part-time.

do part time jobs even count?

also if someone has two jobs at two different places, does that count as two jobs?

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 13:28:

quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
do part time jobs even count?

also if someone has two jobs at two different places, does that count as two jobs?

any job for which a Record Of Employment (ROE) has been filed with Human Resources Canada counts.... which is to say, if someone is working on the books for any employer regardless of the number of hours they put in.

Yes, someone working two jobs at two different employers would count as two jobs as there are two different ROEs.

Posted by malek on Oct-10-2008 13:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
While it sounds like good news I always wonder how many of those new part time jobs are actually just two part time jobs replacing a full time job that has been lost. I have 27 employees... if I replaced those 27 full time people with 54 part-time people I would have "created" 27 new jobs. So how many of these "new" jobs are actually employers replacing students who were working full time in the summer with a number of students now working part time?

all of this is right here: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subje.../LFS/lfs-en.htm

So in September, 113k persons entered the job market. From within that number 107k found jobs, 10k were full time, 97k were part time.

Maybe they're seasonal jobs? The ratio seems really weird.

The %of part time jobs overall is 18.8%

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 14:02:

quote:
Originally posted by malek
all of this is right here: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subje.../LFS/lfs-en.htm

So in September, 113k persons entered the job market. From within that number 107k found jobs, 10k were full time, 97k were part time.

Maybe they're seasonal jobs? The ratio seems really weird.

The %of part time jobs overall is 18.8%

I think Chemy probably got it right... many of those 97K PT jobs are two or three people filling the hours left vacant by a student who was working full time over the summer and can now only work part time. If 30,000 students were to terminate their full time summer jobs in September then employers would need anywhere from 60-90,000 part timers (depending on hours per week worked) to fill that void.

Posted by MarkT on Oct-10-2008 15:14:

quote:
Originally posted by Master Kush
LOL can't beleive you're defending Dion on this. If he can't understand a simple question that any 10 year old could, then he shouldn't be representing our country.

It's embarassing that this guy is the leader of the Liberal's.

If you can't understand the relevance of Dion's unanwered request for context, and how that directly contributed to the confusion, then I'd argue it's *you* who has the problem

As for PT work being created...big deal. Most PT jobs have low pay, provide little to no benefits, little job security and hardly allow someone to support themselves, nevermind a family. PT jobs are typically filled by students, seniors, 2nd income earners in a household...or someone hold 2-3 of them to make ends meet.

That's *exactly* the point being put forth by those poking holes in the CPC "job creation" numbers. HIGH QUALITY, HIGH PAYING jobs are being lost...and the jobs "created" in their place are garbage in comparison.

Posted by Skipper on Oct-10-2008 16:32:

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 16:39:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
It's not the most ideal way to ask the question, but in order to be addressing the financial crisis today, the PM would have had to HAVE DONE various things before the present time. Interviewer was asking what those things were.

I understand asking for clarification, but he asks THREE times. And after each time, continues to answer the question despite clearly not understanding what he was being asked. Why not spend a little more time understanding the question before you start providing an answer?

The liberal aide understood the question, didn't she?

Dion is absolutely painful to watch. Moreso than Palin. If these two get elected I'm throwing myself in front of a train.

My understanding was that it was an ATV staffer that clarified the question. It would seem that that person was the only one who understood it, as Harvey explicitly said "no" when Dion asked if he meant what would Dion have done if he had been PM for the last 2.5 years; however, it turns out that is what the question was intended to ask.

Painful to watch... sure, that's a good criteria upon which to base a vote. Strange that someone who presents herself as highly intelligent (and I don't doubt that you are) would be so influenced by something so superficial. I would never presume to tell someone how to vote; however, I really do hope you have better reasons for your decision.

Posted by Yohan on Oct-10-2008 16:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
Dion is absolutely painful to watch. Moreso than Palin. If these two get elected I'm throwing myself in front of a train.

lol. you feel that strongly about those two eh.

the latest poll numbers are kinda scary. possible Lib win w/ coalition with NDP or Green....

Posted by malek on Oct-10-2008 16:53:

For a french speaker, this question doesn't make sense because it has past and present tences in the same sentence.

I'm wondering why no one is making any fuss about M. Baird or most CPC ministers ability to answer in French.

Posted by Moral Hazard on Oct-10-2008 16:54:

quote:
Originally posted by Yohan
the latest poll numbers are kinda scary. possible Lib win w/ coalition with NDP or Green....

is it still a 4-5 point spread?

I think I'd rather have a Cons. minority then a Lib-NDP coalition.

Pages (16): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 »