|
Liberals to form Coalition with NDP (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| English Rachel |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Oh yeah. 0.3% GDP growth is sooooooooooo struggling. |
I know what the GDP growth is. I am very happy about that.
I am also aware that the next 2 periods have been projected at negative growth. A third one of those periods and we're officially in recession.
I call that struggling. |
|
|
| PurpleHaze |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
Oh GOD...even I wouldn't vote for that party.....the internal bickering would destroy us before the election even happened. |
Who would lead the party?? :wtf: |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by English Rachel
I call that struggling. |
Struggling is what this country will be doing after throwing $30 billion of borrowed public money at unionist "make work" projects. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by English Rachel
I know what the GDP growth is. I am very happy about that.
I am also aware that the next 2 periods have been projected at negative growth. A third one of those periods and we're officially in recession.
I call that struggling. |
Yes, but it IS a little dishonest to tie a 350-million dollar election to a struggling economy that's been sent into turmoil by trillions of dollars of over-extended, easy credit from other countries. OUR economy is slowing because the price of oil and commodities are dropping as other countries have to deal with this crisis, not because our elections cost a lot. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by PurpleHaze
Who would lead the party?? :wtf: |
Pfft, why ask such a stupid question?
JayX1 would rock tha hizouse...
... of PARLIAMENT!!!!! Bwahahahaaha |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
OUR economy is slowing because the price of oil and commodities are dropping as other countries have to deal with this crisis |
Bingo.
Our economy is not slowing because of structural problems, therfore the same "stimulus approach" (that other countries are using) is not necessary [at this time]. Huge government stimulus in Canada will likely cause additoinal near-term pressures and long term debt issues. |
|
|
| daves |
is the way to go really to do nothing though? nothing of much relevance?
except to use an "economic update" to try and clip the wings from the opposition parties and stomp a mudhole into the public sector? |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by daves
clip the wings from the opposition parties and stomp a mudhole into the public sector? |
A few million dollars of party funding is hardly clipping the wings!
Political parties already get millions (way more than the $2 per vote) in tax credits, tax exemptions and donation schemes (none of which were touched by Harper, but were by Cretien when he changed donation rules [for the better IMO]).
The $30 million (spread amongst 4 parties, one of which is separatist) is NOTHING but a drop in the pan compared to other fund raising activities.
Economic stimulus is an excuse for the socialists and separatists to overthrow an elected parliament. Party funding is another (absurd) excuse for socialist and separatist interference. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by daves
is the way to go really to do nothing though? nothing of much relevance?
except to use an "economic update" to try and clip the wings from the opposition parties and stomp a mudhole into the public sector? |
Let the market fix itself to recover. In the end, that's what happens anyway. They're correct when they say they've already taken stimulus-like measures like cutting the GST and other targetted tax cuts to put more money in our pockets.
Any government solution that doesn't involve money going DIRECTLY back to the tax-payers is a waste of money and will NOT work, not that giving the money to the tax-payers is any guarantee to fix the economy either, but at least it'll go to back to the people.
The economy will not recover until the general population starts to spend money again. The problem is that there's a backlog of bad credit that needs to clear the system before we see that recovery begin. |
|
|
| Dr. DAS |
I voted Green in the last election for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that I disagreed with the election in principle.
I wasn't going to vote for the Tories after they called such a bull election, I'll never vote for Dion and the NDP...well, you know. I'd rather the Greens get the funding afforded by my vote.
However, the opposition parties need to respect the decision of the voters. If they want to topple the goverment and install a coalition, they should force another election and run as a coalition.
The last thing I want is another run at the polls, but that would be a better marker than just saying 'Well, we outnumber them now, so let's put aside our differences and take over.'. The GG should NOT allow this to happen.
You los the election. Badly.
Grow the up and deal with it. |
|
|
| English Rachel |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Struggling is what this country will be doing after throwing $30 billion of borrowed public money at unionist "make work" projects. |
I don't agree with doing that.
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
Yes, but it IS a little dishonest to tie a 350-million dollar election to a struggling economy that's been sent into turmoil by trillions of dollars of over-extended, easy credit from other countries. OUR economy is slowing because the price of oil and commodities are dropping as other countries have to deal with this crisis, not because our elections cost a lot. |
I didn't say it was the cause, I just don't think we need to waste 350 million wherever possible :) |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spam
Pfft, why ask such a stupid question?
JayX1 would rock tha hizouse... |
pfft; jay just regurgitates talking points from the CPC web site or what he heard on the Oakley show earlier in the day. If he were PM he'd be lost since there would be no one to tell him what his opinion is. |
|
|
|
|
