Politics - Conservatives (Split Topic)

[The Unknown Poster]

Man, we have a lotta crazy Con's on this board. I'm far from a "Leftist" but am absolutely terrified of true dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. (Note small c)

After living in Winkler area for a couple years, I had my eyes opened. I like to see myself as extremely socially liberal, and somewhat fiscally conservative. A "Blue Liberal", if you will...and a staunch anti-Harper advocate as well. Not sure JPT is the answer, but right now it's "Anyone But Harper".....

Country is in far better Shape under Harper than it would have been otherwise. The blind hate for the scary Harper is laughable. Anyone but Harper? Let's hope he's PM for another five years at least.

[Fatty Liver]

 

Man, we have a lotta crazy Con's on this board. I'm far from a "Leftist" but am absolutely terrified of true dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. (Note small c)

After living in Winkler area for a couple years, I had my eyes opened. I like to see myself as extremely socially liberal, and somewhat fiscally conservative. A "Blue Liberal", if you will...and a staunch anti-Harper advocate as well. Not sure JPT is the answer, but right now it's "Anyone But Harper".....

Country is in far better Shape under Harper than it would have been otherwise. The blind hate for the scary Harper is laughable. Anyone but Harper? Let's hope he's PM for another five years at least.

 

 

It's easy to say "he's better than the other guy" but please iterate all of the wonderful things Harper has done for Canada?  I should state that I am apolitical not because I don't care but because I've read enough about politics to understand the business of it and essentially how all political  parties are representing the same interests.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

Man, we have a lotta crazy Con's on this board. I'm far from a "Leftist" but am absolutely terrified of true dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. (Note small c)

After living in Winkler area for a couple years, I had my eyes opened. I like to see myself as extremely socially liberal, and somewhat fiscally conservative. A "Blue Liberal", if you will...and a staunch anti-Harper advocate as well. Not sure JPT is the answer, but right now it's "Anyone But Harper".....

Country is in far better Shape under Harper than it would have been otherwise. The blind hate for the scary Harper is laughable. Anyone but Harper? Let's hope he's PM for another five years at least.

 

 

It's easy to say "he's better than the other guy" but please iterate all of the wonderful things Harper has done for Canada?  I should state that I am apolitical not because I don't care but because I've read enough about politics to understand the business of it and essentially how all political  parties are representing the same interests.

 

Off topic.  Maybe the mods would want to split this off if people still want to discuss politics.

 

The Harper government has done many things, directly and indirectly.

 

They lowered taxes.  I actually am not a supporter of lowering the GST.  I want when they ran on it but strategically it was very smart and I know people that strongly believe the GST reduction helps them so there's that.  I generally feel that a tax like the GST generates a significant revenue without being overly burdensome.  But "lower taxes" is a positive.  They campaigned on it, promised it and delivered it.  Brought in income splitting, which the promised.

 

Created the Tax Free Savings Account.  Im not overly knowledgable on investment but I can tell you my parents LOVE the TFSA and prefer it over RSP's.

 

They've been tougher on crime.  They campiagned on raising the age of consent and delivered.  It was a no-brainer and the close-in-age exception made sense (even though the idea of teens having sex probably ran counter to fundemental conservative ideals),  They did other things to improve justice as well like eliminating 2 for 1 credit, dropping the house arrest or whatever its called and ofcourse as we learned just last week, allowing for longer sentences in regards to parole elegiability.

 

Something that should be interesting to the Union friendly Manitoba population is the feds ban on corporate and union donations and the lowering of individual donations.

 

Introduced the universal child tax benefit.  They campaigned on it, promised it and delivered it.

 

Repealed portions of the gun registry.

 

Increased patrol of the North which might not seem important now but will likely be very important in the future.

 

And quite honestly, I think increased our image and clout in the world.  The one thing I like is that, regardless of what side of the political spectrum you fall, you have to admit that they made promises when they campaigned and delivered those promises.

 

Canada came through the recession better then any other G7 nation.

 

So thats just a few things that the Harper government has done.

[bigg jay]

 

They did other things to improve justice as well like eliminating 2 for 1 credit, dropping the house arrest or whatever its called and ofcourse as we learned just last week, allowing for longer sentences in regards to parole elegiability.

 

That part is incorrect.  Judges can & do still hand out Conditional Sentences (house arrest) all the time.  What the government did do is revise the criteria (like they did with pardons) to restrict those types of sentences to less serious crimes.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

They did other things to improve justice as well like eliminating 2 for 1 credit, dropping the house arrest or whatever its called and ofcourse as we learned just last week, allowing for longer sentences in regards to parole elegiability.

 

That part is incorrect.  Judges can & do still hand out Conditional Sentences (house arrest) all the time.  What the government did do is revise the criteria (like they did with pardons) to restrict those types of sentences to less serious crimes.

 

I stand corrected.  Good change regardless.

[blueandgoldguy]

Lowering the GST was a dumb move.  Purely political and not something any economist would advocate.  It's a consumption tax.  Would have mitigated the annual deficit we have had since 2009.  Reducing corporate taxes to their current rate is also questionable as it hasn't really led to lower employment rates.  Instead of investing in their workers the money has been hoarded by corporations in the form of dividends to their shareholders.  Obviously need to keep rates competitive with other countries, but it would have been in the country's best interest to keep the rates at previous levels to eliminate the deficit (which we were promised would never have happened back in 2008).

 

Still undecided who I will vote for come election time.  Right now, I think we will see a minority government - liberal or conservative.

[17to85]

Cutting taxes and government spending is either some you agree with or you don't. That's the biggest difference between left and right in terms of the fiscal side of it anyway. Lots of people say "yeah raise taxes, keep the government spending going" others simply want less tax burden and balance the budget by reducing services that aren't super important. There is a line to walk. 

 

Now cutting the GST wasn't about anything other than a giant middle finger to the Liberals and their little red book of lies. Remember when the Liberals promised to abolish the GST if elected and then didn't touch it? The Conservatives did that basically as a way to say to people "unlike the Liberals when we promise to do something we will do it" It was politics pure and simple. Cutting taxes though is not something I oppose. There's too much bloat and spending from the government cutting taxes and cutting spending is OK with me. 

 

There's a lot of other things this government does that annoy me though. It's a damned shame I don't trust the Liberals to give a damn about Western Canada and the NDP are just a non starter. Real tough time to be a conservative because the options aren't all that great right now. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Lowering the GST was a dumb move. Purely political and not something any economist would advocate. It's a consumption tax. Would have mitigated the annual deficit we have had since 2009. Reducing corporate taxes to their current rate is also questionable as it hasn't really led to lower employment rates. Instead of investing in their workers the money has been hoarded by corporations in the form of dividends to their shareholders. Obviously need to keep rates competitive with other countries, but it would have been in the country's best interest to keep the rates at previous levels to eliminate the deficit (which we were promised would never have happened back in 2008).

Still undecided who I will vote for come election time. Right now, I think we will see a minority government - liberal or conservative.

I don't disagree about the GST but it doesn't matter. They campaigned on it. They promised it. They won and they delivered on their promote. Period. Ultimately lower taxes is never a bad thing. It's just not what I would have done.

[Fatty Liver]

 

Lowering the GST was a dumb move. Purely political and not something any economist would advocate. It's a consumption tax. Would have mitigated the annual deficit we have had since 2009. Reducing corporate taxes to their current rate is also questionable as it hasn't really led to lower employment rates. Instead of investing in their workers the money has been hoarded by corporations in the form of dividends to their shareholders. Obviously need to keep rates competitive with other countries, but it would have been in the country's best interest to keep the rates at previous levels to eliminate the deficit (which we were promised would never have happened back in 2008).

Still undecided who I will vote for come election time. Right now, I think we will see a minority government - liberal or conservative.

I don't disagree about the GST but it doesn't matter. They campaigned on it. They promised it. They won and they delivered on their promote. Period. Ultimately lower taxes is never a bad thing. It's just not what I would have done.

 

 

Lower taxes and a ballooning public service and deficit.  How do those ingredients reconcile in the ledger book?

[The Unknown Poster]

Apparently they do. Since the conservatives will post a surplus. Again, as promised.

My favourite (as in most hilarious) liberal nonsense was their insistence that the Cons run a higher deficit than they intended (and not even as high as the liberals and NDP wanted) when the recession hit. And then after the fact accused the cons of fiscal irresponsibility for running such a deficit.

[Jpan85]

I am from the old Progressive Conservatives. Have voted conservative in every elections. Saying that I think its time for a change although the alternatives are not the greatest. Any time you start have a party that has been in power for over 10 years seem to get stagnant. Can see that in Manitoba right now.

[Fatty Liver]

Apparently they do. Since the conservatives will post a surplus. Again, as promised.

My favourite (as in most hilarious) liberal nonsense was their insistence that the Cons run a higher deficit than they intended (and not even as high as the liberals and NDP wanted) when the recession hit. And then after the fact accused the cons of fiscal irresponsibility for running such a deficit.

 

Pulling in a timely surplus prior to an election date does not make this govt. good economic managers and does not excuse running up the overall debt of the nation into the stratosphere.  This is the basis of good economic management, don't get fooled by the marketing dept.

 

Again you've reverted to the justification of "the other guys would have done worse".

[The Unknown Poster]

I don't disagree. But if you don't like the deficit then you should want to vote for the cons over the liberals and NDP who wanted the deficit even higher.

Quite honestly would the opposition have been better at leadong our country through the recession? I shudder to think.

[17to85]

I don't disagree. But if you don't like the deficit then you should want to vote for the cons over the liberals and NDP who wanted the deficit even higher.

Quite honestly would the opposition have been better at leadong our country through the recession? I shudder to think.

Every party believes in balanced budgets... of course to get theirs the NDP would simply tax more. The Liberals quite likely would have taken many of the same courses to guide the country through the recession. They and the Conservatives are similar in their economic policies, they really only quibble over how much they reduce taxes. In fact a big boon to the Conservatives throughout the recession were things the Liberals put in place (and likewise the Liberals balancing the budget when they were in power were helped by existing policies left over from the PCs. 

 

That's the thing about politics, often times you don't fully see what a governments legacy is until they've been out of office because changing government doesn't change the things they've done. The Liberals were good economic stewards much like the Conservatives have been. I can't bring myself to vote Liberal though, they are still too eastern focussed and love nothing more than keeping the west under their eastern thumb. 

[The Unknown Poster]

My point is the cons came in preaching fiscal restraint and got side tracked by the recession. But the opposition insisted the cons run a higher deficit as a result. The cons ended up running a higher deficit than they wanted to avoid the political war. Point being the opposition would have run a much higher deficit and then raised taxes to off set it while blaming everyone and everything other than their policies.

[17to85]

Spending during a recession is good policy any complaining about it by the opposition is simply politics hoping people are too stupid to understand what was going on.

[Mr Dee]

Blah, blah, blah said one political party.

Not true says the opposing party. It is more like blah, blah blah.

 

If we were in Ireland, that would be known as blah-rny.

 

Never mind….it still is.

 

We suffer under the indulgences of whichever political party is in charge.

 

And yes and no, the opposition is always/never better.

 

But thank goodness, we can even say that.

[iso_55]

It should be called blah-sphemy!

[The Unknown Poster]

Fun seeing the opposition whine about a surplus.  NDP calling it a "mirage" due to spending cuts.  They promise the moon but neglect to promise "higher taxes" to pay for it all.

 

I dont see the issue with the income splitting.  I dont benefit but so be it.  I especially love when people say its a tax break for the rich.  If I had kids, id qualify.  Im not rich.  The NDP plan, I can guarantee would result in higher taxes for people like me.  Keep us all poor on the government teat.

[17to85]

The problem with calling it a tax break is that every tax break is a tax break for the rich because poor people don't pay much in taxes! Any time you lessen the tax load it always benefits people with more money more than people with no money. The problem the left has it that they love to spend other people money. "Oh just tax the wealthy or businesses" they say. The important part is that someone other than they themselves pay for it. 

[Fraser]

The problem with calling it a tax break is that every tax break is a tax break for the rich because poor people don't pay much in taxes! Any time you lessen the tax load it always benefits people with more money more than people with no money. The problem the left has it that they love to spend other people money. "Oh just tax the wealthy or businesses" they say. The important part is that someone other than they themselves pay for it.

Government is the great fallacy where everyone endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else.

Or something like that.

[The Unknown Poster]

The problem with calling it a tax break is that every tax break is a tax break for the rich because poor people don't pay much in taxes! Any time you lessen the tax load it always benefits people with more money more than people with no money. The problem the left has it that they love to spend other people money. "Oh just tax the wealthy or businesses" they say. The important part is that someone other than they themselves pay for it.

Exactly. What the cons are doing isn't what I would do. But I don't have a problem with it. It's a "middle class" tax break. What's wrong with that? People in my tax bracket deserve a break too. The cons campaigned on it and they won. They are now delivering on their promise. The opposition can squawk all they want to but their promises are terribly transparent - tax the middle class to fund all their "programs".

[Jaxon]

The best  middle class program that the federal Tories have implemented is the Tax Free Savings Account  (TFSA)

 

At a limit of 5,500 per year, it really doesn't mean much to the top earners.  The typical NHL player goes through that in the first period of the first game, so for them, it's a drop in the bucket.   Not much benefit either for the welfare recipients, or for lower income earners, but we already have other programs for them.  This program was aimed at the "middle class", and for those smart enough to do some long range planning, it is a significant program.    It also doesn't have much immediate benefit, but It does, overtime, make a huge difference to your savings.   I just wish that it had been available when I was younger. 

[17to85]

The best  middle class program that the federal Tories have implemented is the Tax Free Savings Account  (TFSA)

 

At a limit of 5,500 per year, it really doesn't mean much to the top earners.  The typical NHL player goes through that in the first period of the first game, so for them, it's a drop in the bucket.   Not much benefit either for the welfare recipients, or for lower income earners, but we already have other programs for them.  This program was aimed at the "middle class", and for those smart enough to do some long range planning, it is a significant program.    It also doesn't have much immediate benefit, but It does, overtime, make a huge difference to your savings.   I just wish that it had been available when I was younger. 

yeah the TFSA is a great savings tool. I hate that banks are always trying to push people into just using it as a savings account, such a waste, the true potential of a TFSA is to invest in something long term with good growth potential. Better than an RRSP for savings, everyone should be taking advantage of it. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Agreed. Fantastic savings device.