|
Liberals to form Coalition with NDP (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
If the house has no confidence, there should be an immediate election. Just because an unelected government supported by separatists is within our constitution, it doesnt make it ethical or morally right. Places like Venezuela and Cuba have constitutions too i might add. If dion and layton are so confident that this is the right thing to do, why are they afraid of an election?
The answer is clear. Michelle Jean should call another election and there should be a constitutional reform to ensure that this never is allowed to happen again. If Dion or Layton wins the majority share of votes, then they can do whatever they want. Until then, respect the decision of the people or ask for a new one. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
If the house has no confidence, there should be an immediate election. Just because an unelected government supported by separatists is within our constitution, it doesnt make it ethical or morally right. Places like Venezuela and Cuba have constitutions too i might add. If dion and layton are so confident that this is the right thing to do, why are they afraid of an election?
The answer is clear. Michelle Jean should call another election and there should be a constitutional reform to ensure that this never is allowed to happen again. If Dion or Layton wins the majority share of votes, then they can do whatever they want. Until then, respect the decision of the people or ask for a new one. |
The people's decision was to give Harper a minority and ask that the parties show some cooperation to do what they can to ease the economic crisis. Harper should have attempted to cooperate with the other parties instead of attempting to bankrupt them. The Canadian public in general want ALL the parties to get along for their 4 year mandate and bring about real results. Yes, it's difficult because of ideological differences, but blatant partisan attacks from Harper weren't what the public in general voted for either.
I agree there should be an election though, I've already said that. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
I have no way of fact-checking this, but I've heard anecdotal evidence that says some of the laid-off NA-company workers have already got jobs with Toyota and Honda factories nearby. Notably, Toyota and Honda aren't crying at the government teat begging for a bail-out, at least that I've heard. |
I'm not certain about Honda; however, Toyota has reduced it's production in Cambridge. It's not just the big three that are suffering... Toyota has had a 30% reductions in sales year over year from this October to last. Additionally, while Toyota and Honda are not very vocal about it they would be included in any Ontario bailout.
| quote: | | A loss isn't always a loss, sometimes those jobs just move. For instance, there's still a huge demand in most physical labour industries... Landscaping, renovation, snow-plowing in the winter... Sometimes people need to accept that the job they know just isn't an option anymore and move on. There are opportunities everywhere, even in the middle of the Great Depression, which it's been said many times, resulted in more millionaires both per capita and in raw numbers than at any other time in America's history. |
There is only a huge demand because people are willing and able to pay for these services. An economy that is entirely based on service is doomed to failure unless the top layer of services are marketed to foreign nationals (as money must be injected to the economy from somewhere that produces wealth)... which would be difficult in this economy. That said, I agree that loss is an opportunity for gain... in fact one of my favorite quotes is Nietzsche "let all that is falling also be pushed." I have complete faith that if the auto sector in Canada were to fall completely it would pave the way for a stronger and more robust industry to build one the now vacant infrastructure. I'd actually like to see the big 3 fail because I am confident that their failure would be a long term benefit; however, I am also a pragmatist. We should let them fail; however, that failure needs to be managed in such a way that it mitigates the severity of economic implications and that it spreads those consequences out over a manageable time line. This is absolutely necessary as we have guaranteed a standard of living to all Canadians through the welfare state and we have guaranteed (in Ontario) the pensions of CAW workers. If 14% of the population of this province were to suddenly rely on EI followed by social assistance for a protracted period of time while the Crown were to assume the liability of CAW pensions the economy of Ontario would falter enormously for an extensive period. This, in turn, would result in there being insufficient tax revenues to cover our obligations thereby necessitating Ontario receiving most of what it pays to Ottawa back in transfer payments (perhaps more). Since Ontario is the greatest contributor to the federal coffers it is probable that removing that tax revenue would create a domino effect that only Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland would be insulated from (and they would only be insulated provided that oil prices do not decline much below their present value). To summarize; I'm not opposed to the failure of the auto industry but we cannot allow it to happen in an unregulated and immediate fashion. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
If the house has no confidence, there should be an immediate election. Just because an unelected government supported by separatists is within our constitution, it doesnt make it ethical or morally right. Places like Venezuela and Cuba have constitutions too i might add. If dion and layton are so confident that this is the right thing to do, why are they afraid of an election?
The answer is clear. Michelle Jean should call another election and there should be a constitutional reform to ensure that this never is allowed to happen again. If Dion or Layton wins the majority share of votes, then they can do whatever they want. Until then, respect the decision of the people or ask for a new one. |
Morals and ethics are tricky. I'm not saying I support this Lib-NDP move (see my initial post in this thread); however, I'm not sure the GG really has a choice. Her constitutional mandate is to submit to the will of parliament... if a majority of the MPs want her to do something then that is what she must do. Assuming she believes that Dion has the confidence of the majority of the MPs (and I do not see any reason she wouldn't) then she's more or less stuck. I just hope Harper asks for parliament to be pirouged before the confidence motion comes to the floor. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
The people's decision was to give Harper a minority and ask that the parties show some cooperation to do what they can to ease the economic crisis. Harper should have attempted to cooperate with the other parties instead of attempting to bankrupt them. The Canadian public in general want ALL the parties to get along for their 4 year mandate and bring about real results. Yes, it's difficult because of ideological differences, but blatant partisan attacks from Harper weren't what the public in general voted for either.
I agree there should be an election though, I've already said that. |
While Harper may be guilty of pissing off the opposition, the remedy is that the opposition has the power to pull the plug at any time. Their game of chicken already worked as Harper has decided to cooperate by taking the contentious issues off the table. But that is not good enough for Layton or Dion and they insist that nothing can stop them now. It is a brazen lust for power. This stops just short of a coup de tat and i wont tolerate it in my country. This is not a partisan issue for me and i kind of wish that it were the other way around in order for me to demonstrate that.
This issue is not about left wing or right wing, its about the future of our country and the value of our elections. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
The people's decision was to give Harper a minority and ask that the parties show some cooperation to do what they can to ease the economic crisis. |
No, no, no. Why do people keep mischaracterizing how our system works. Canadians gave a mandate to 143 conservative members, 77 liberal members, 49 bloc members, 37 NDP members, and 2 independents to form a government. We do not vote for a government, we vote for representatives who then decide amongst themselves who the government will be. A government only has power if it is given it by the majority of the representatives of the electorate.
| quote: | | Harper should have attempted to cooperate with the other parties instead of attempting to bankrupt them. The Canadian public in general want ALL the parties to get along for their 4 year mandate and bring about real results. Yes, it's difficult because of ideological differences, but blatant partisan attacks from Harper weren't what the public in general voted for either. |
Agreed. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | | Originally posted by Moral Hazard |
Can't argue with the logic you've provided, thanks for informing me. Agree with you on having to manage the failure of the Big Three, just wish it would happen sooner rather than later so we can move on to that nice, green, freshly cut grass over there. :D |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
No, no, no. Why do people keep mischaracterizing how our system works. Canadians gave a mandate to 143 conservative members, 77 liberal members, 49 bloc members, 37 NDP members, and 2 independents to form a government. We do not vote for a government, we vote for representatives who then decide amongst themselves who the government will be. A government only has power if it is given it by the majority of the representatives of the electorate. |
I think you've misunderstood my point. I'm not talking about how the system works. I'm guessing at what the collective mindset of the voting public was, given the result. You'll also notice that I didn't declare that we gave Harper any form of power.
People mischaracterize how the system works because they don't understand it. If they did, I'm certain many would want it changed to either reflect that reality (a mixed cabinet during minority government) or change that reality (we vote for the government). I was only speaking of what I believe people want from our government, not the reality of how it is actually run. |
|
|
| Superstring |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Additionally, while Toyota and Honda are not very vocal about it they would be included in any Ontario bailout. |
I have my doubts about this.
In fact, here's a statement: Honda, Toyota and all the other Japanese/European/Korean/etc automakers will not be included in the bailout by the governments of Canada or the United States.
If I'm wrong, you can send me an invoice for a twenty dollar bill. |
|
|
| exstasie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
As much as I despise the idea of bailing out such poorly managed companies it's pretty difficult to allow the loss of a minimum 14% of the jobs in Ontario on principle. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
I have no way of fact-checking this, but I've heard anecdotal evidence that says some of the laid-off NA-company workers have already got jobs with Toyota and Honda factories nearby. Notably, Toyota and Honda aren't crying at the government teat begging for a bail-out, at least that I've heard.
A loss isn't always a loss, sometimes those jobs just move. For instance, there's still a huge demand in most physical labour industries... Landscaping, renovation, snow-plowing in the winter... Sometimes people need to accept that the job they know just isn't an option anymore and move on. There are opportunities everywhere, even in the middle of the Great Depression, which it's been said many times, resulted in more millionaires both per capita and in raw numbers than at any other time in America's history.
I often wonder why we prop up these big auto-businesses when they cry that they might go bankrupt. Are you telling me that some savvy entrepreneur (granted, he'd probably have to be rich) wouldn't buy Ford's infrastructure in an INSTANT if the company crashed, and start his own auto-company? I often feel like the reason mega-corporations are able to have so much power is because we allow them suffocate starting businesses that would allow an industry to diversify, and thus have different aspects of that industry flourish under different market situations.
Short term fixes are just that... fixes for the short term. |
What Spam said.
But also one thing and important thing to remember is...just because a company files bankruptcy doesn't mean that everyone is being laid-off and that's the end of the company.
GM will most likely be the first to file for bankruptcy (if there is no bailout). Some other company will come in and buy them out, or takeover GM, and implement new management. The first thing they need to do is create a new long-term strategy to be competitive, and they will need a new management to do that.
|
|
|
| Jayx1 |
So my neighbour says "im never voting NDP or Liberal ever again." To which i reply "Don't worry, the Liberals and the NDP are making sure that you won't have to!"
Very disturbing times. The lions have acted after years of indifference by canadians towards their own country. |
|
|
|
|
