Election 2015

[iso_55]

 

 

Nah, I'd say AB PC corruption & entitlement, Prentice calling an election a year early despite a fixed election date with opposition parties in a flux leadership wise & not expecting an election for another year, Prentice telling Albertans to look in a mirror & the PC's blaming everybody for the financial mess in the province but himself, freezing funding to education & health care & 44 years in power thinking they will never lose was the true clusterfuck that brought the PC's down. The NDP was in the right place at the right time.

 

But don't blame me as I voted Wild Rose.

 

 

Excellent synopsis.  And I snorted and laughed when you said the last sentence, as you sound like every Albertan I met this summer.

 

Yeah, it was time to turf those @$$... Tories. The Liberals are a joke in this province. They had no leader going into the election so they brought back a retread interim leader who quit years ago. The only party that was a viable alternative to a lot of people were the NDP. The Wildrose Party is still new & trying to reinvent itself from a socially  conservative party with a lot of religious zealots to a more a more inclusive centrist right wing party if that makes sense. Just that people remembered that "lake of fire" comment from the 2012 election & want nothing to with Wild Rose. And their leader was elected a day or so before the spring election was called & virtually no one knew him. So, people turned to the NDP. I expect the WRP to be a lot stronger, their leader will be familiar with everyone & absolutely ready to win the next Alberta provincial election in 2019 or whenever the NDP call an election. It'll be a 2 party race with the Tories absolutely crushed like they should be.

[rebusrankin]

Shaw Communications Inc, Suncor Energy Inc, -Profit sharing and a share purchase plan for all employees

TD Bank has a program to match shares bought for all employees.

 

Yep, nobody helps out employees.

[17to85]

The greatest lie the NDP tells is setting the bar at what constitutes "the rich"

 

They make it sound like it's only the super wealthy that will get taxed, but the reality is that many of the higher tax brackets hit the middle class too because "rich" is such a subjective amount. I'm rich compared to a lot of people but compared to really rich people I might as well be a pauper. 

[The Unknown Poster]

My company also has a share plan. I believe it's up to 6% of salary can be used on shares and company matches 25%. So it's pretty good. Dividend goes right into more share purchases too.

We are also unionized and I detest my Union. They did help me out once though. But I think it's more that they fight every little thing so once in awhile they win.

[sweep the leg]

My company also has a share plan. I believe it's up to 6% of salary can be used on shares and company matches 25%. So it's pretty good. Dividend goes right into more share purchases too.

We are also unionized and I detest my Union. They did help me out once though. But I think it's more that they fight every little thing so once in awhile they win.

You don't think your union had any thing to do with getting you that share plan?

[StevetheClub]

 

 

I'm glad you asked KBF.

 

If you were glad I asked, then why didn't you answer the question?  Why are the other two guys better options?  Instead of just cutting and pasting rhetoric prepared for you by union-sponsored NDP propaganda arms, why not give me positive reasons why the other guys are better?  Starting off your entire post with more blarney about Harper being the worst prime minister ever just guarantees I am going to tune out whatever you have to say, as it is going to just be more biased left-wing crap.  When Harper goes on a train trip across Canada with his family, and is greeted at every whistle stop with people throwing eggs and yelling **** YOU!! at the train, like people did in 1982 with Pierre Trudeau, then I'd agree, Harper is in the same area code as Trudeau was in terms of being the worst.  Right now, he's not even in the same solar system as the suckage experienced by Canada under Trudeau.  And anyone who says otherwise is just wearing partisan blinders.

 

Geez man, it seems sometimes, not always, that anytime a person posts something that runs counter to what you believe, you respond with these type statements. The hypocrisy is dripping here.

I think some of of us take more of an eclectic approach to politics and sensitive issues by not branding our ideologies as left, center or right. We take it issue by issue using the best facts available to form our perspectives. We sometimes don't get it right but always try to take an evidence-informed approach, identifying any bias's we may have a long the way. We can't brand ourselves with only one political strip but we can always aspire to be a sound critical thinker hopefully adding value to the discussion.   

 

 

Very well put. As someone who is somewhat politically literate but not following all the issues all the time, this thread at times has been informative. I have to say, though, the constant insults and generalizations, are really becoming tiresome and will soon keep me from this thread.

[Mr Dee]

I don't  care about all the bad stuff Harper has supposedly done, ......

You can't be serious...

[Fraser]

Shaw Communications Inc, Suncor Energy Inc, -Profit sharing and a share purchase plan for all employees

TD Bank has a program to match shares bought for all employees.

Yep, nobody helps out employees.

Stock options and share purchase are entirely different things

[Fraser]

Ok you you know one place that gives is janitors stock options? Most places just give them to executives. Unless you are talking about a share ownership plan then I agree. Stock options aren't even taxed preferentially unless they are out of the money and if they are in the money they should be taxed as income cause thats what they are. Not really sure what you arw getting at.

It sounds like you've spent too much time being lectured to by unions and leftist teachers/professors, who haven't actually ever been in the real world, or have a vested interest in lying to you to make you think that all corporations and management are evil and greedy. "Most places just give them to executives". No, that's just plain not true. At all. Have you ever worked for a public company? I spent 15 years in high tech, and every high tech company I worked for, public and private, made sure that all employees, from the secretary to the top, received a chance to share in the big prize if the stock price went up, via stock options. I know that the NDP like to peddle the fallacy that only "fat-cat" CEO's get stock options, but this is just plain a giant load of bullshit. Almost as big as saying that the Conservatives have cut $36 billion from health care spending.

And stock options are taxed as income, but only 50% of the gain is taxable. There are valid reasons for this, but of course, if you believe the NDP garbage that "only the rich benefit" from stock options, it makes it an easier sell to the jealous and naive that they should be taxed at 100%. This is unnecessarily punishing hundreds of thousands of people, for no reason. This is one of the many reasons why I think the NDP is a giant smoking pile of hot garbage. All they do is lie. Constantly.

No I am a CFA charterholder and am almost done an MBA and worked as a financial planner for years. I've worked for several public companies. What I think is that you don't know the difference between stock options and a share purchase plans or you seem to think the tech industry is representative of most companies.

Tech companies have different compensation schemes from most industries so I don't know why you'd suggest that what goes in tech applies to everyone.

[Fraser]

 

 

Geez man, it seems sometimes, not always, that anytime a person posts something that runs counter to what you believe, you respond with these type statements.

 

 

I asked a simple question - what are the other two guys doing that is better than this Harper guy - and all I got was another barf-back of the same tired propaganda that I've seen on a dozen other sites.  I don't  care about all the bad stuff Harper has supposedly done, I want to know that the other two guys aren't going to be even worse.  So it may be counter to what I believe to just continue to post the same nonsense over and over again rather than post positive stuff about the other two guys when asked for positive stuff about the other two guys, but so what.  That's my opinion, take it or leave it.

 

 

Ok I'll take a stab at it. What is Justin Trudeau doing that's better than Harper. The recommendation to run a deficit budget in a recession with the money being spent on infrastructure is a good idea.

 

A lot of people like to rag on Justin for saying that budgets balance themselves. I think a better question is, does Harper have an idea of what balances budgets? and if he does, why hasn't he balanced a budget in the last 5 years? Notice I didn't say the last 7 years (even though he's ran deficits for 7 years) because I understand that running deficits in a recession is an important use of fiscal policy, Notice I didn't say monetary policy because I understand the difference in fiscal and monetary policy.

 

Now I'm too lazy to look up a paper to source this but I remember  reading in an economics textbook (of one of the two graduate level finance programs that I've participated in) that the very nature of a deficit does little to stimulate an economy in a recession, only increasing it does. That means you have to go from a surplus or a balanced budget into a deficit, or from a deficit to a larger deficit to stimulate the economy. I'll look this up if someone really ******* about it but its true, maintaining a deficit doesn't stimulate the economy, only increasing it does. I can't remember why we have a deficit right now, we weren't in a recession for the last 5 years (we likely are now in my opinion but only time will tell) and Harper is supposedly a good financial steward so I'm not really sure.... but I'll take a stab at it later.

 

So first, we need to be scared of Trudeau and Mulclaire because they are going to run a deficit, but the guy we have right now is running a deficit. Oh that's right, he's just about to stop running them. 2 problems with that though:

 

1) Saying that Harper is going to stop running a deficit soon is like saying that the girlfriend that cheated on you for 5 years is years is going to stop if you sign her up for another 4 years. (again notice I said 5 and not 7 because deficits are a tool to stimulate the economy in a recession so 2 of them are understandable)

2) why the **** would you run a deficit when you are experiencing economic growth and then stop as you enter a recession. Sometimes people make good decision made on the available information they had and it  goes against them. This isn't that, its just bad economic policy. Really bad economic policy. Ass backward economic policy.

 

So why do I like deficits spent on infrastructure in a recession.

 

1) moving into a deficit (or larger deficit) stimulates the economy in recession.

2) If you are saddling future generations with debt, a least you building an asset that will be useful for them. They are kind of getting what they paid for.

3) Infrastructure spending is one of the only ways a government can create jobs. People can blab on about how lowering business taxes creates jobs etc but that's pretty unproven and even if it does its pretty slow to act. Spending on infrastructure creates instant jobs because someone has to build it and they kind of have to be in Canada cause you can't really build a bridge/freeway in India and China and then move it here.

4) Good infrastructure is an important item necessary for future economic growth

 

Key points 

 

1 - I don't like deficits. I think they should only be used in recessions.

2 - Justin Trudeau can't build a time machine and undo the last 5 years of unbalanced budgets, if he does get elected he has to work with what he has and that would requiring running an even bigger deficit if we are about to enter a recession.

3 -  Would he balance the budget after? I don't know, he did say that budgets balance themselves, its a stupid comment. But is Harper more likely to given his dismal (Ya running  5 straight years of deficits in a period of economic growth is dismal) economic record? I wouldn't bet on that.

 

So what is one of the reasons we are running another  deficit at the moment? One thing  that appears to be contributing to it is the  tax break for 1 income (or 2 income with 1 of the 2 being much larger) upper middle class families (notice I said upper middle class, I don't want to say wealthy and have to make 17 to 85 correct me)

 

Why I don't like this: (spoiler alert, its not because I'm in a lower income 2 income household that is jealous of  people getting more than me)

 

1) I don't like running deficits outside of a recession (this should be pretty clear by now but I wrote it down anyways) and when this was started we weren't in one.

2) If were gonna go into debt it should be for items that help future generations. (you might try to argue that this helps future generations cause the parents that save that money on taxes are going to put it into their kids college fund, but I'd say that's a stretch and I'd be right)

3) It reeks of vote buying and that's got to be the worst ******* reason to run a deficit that I can think of

 

Why I don't expect much of a response from you.

 

1) you seem kinda biased

2) you don't seem very objective (that's kind of the same thing as 1 just in a different way)

3) you seem very set in your ways

 

What I expect as a response from you

 

1 "NDP/Unions are the devil, they like steal and cheat"

2 Something you don't like about Trudeau's platform completely unrelated to what I've said

3 Some kind of excuse for why we've had 5 years of deficits during a period of economic growth (Something I'm not going to buy) or on the flip side telling me the liberals or NDP would have ran even bigger deficits, which is kind of hard to prove given the liberals past success in balancing the budget

 

Final thoughts

 

I lied about looking up the thing about how maintaining an existing level of deficit won't stimulate an economy in a recession. If someone doesn't know that they shouldn't be arguing  economics with me.

 

The tone of this post is pretty condescending. My intention was was to show you how your posts come off (tone wise of course, I feel this post's content has a lot more coherent arguments and a lot less rhetoric, mud slinging and wild accusations than most things you post)

[sweep the leg]

*drops mic*

[17to85]

The only thing I would say is that it's not always as simple as running a deficit or not running a deficit. For example, the Conservatives planned to be deficit free, but with the economy hitting the shitter there's no way for that to happen now barring big tax hikes, which in a recession probably not the greatest idea. With everything being so global these days there are less things a government can do in order to avoid situations like this. 

[Fraser]

If I was going to post an a actual KBF style post this is how it would go.

 

We have this guy at our office that is a big time conservative. He spilled almond milk  all over our work fridge and didn't clean it up. There is only about 10 people that use this fridge and he's the only person that uses almond milk so we all know its him. Don't vote conservative because they are the kinds of people who think they can spill almond milk in their work fridge and someone else will clean it up after them. They must get this view from all their conservative propaganda that's left them all entitled and thinking that someone is going to clean their almond milk up for them.

[rebusrankin]

Fraser, question since you mentioned working as a financial planner, TFSAs, raising the limit to $10,000, good or bad?

[17to85]

Fraser, question since you mentioned working as a financial planner, TFSAs, raising the limit to $10,000, good or bad?

******* amazing. Unless you don't have any money to save then it doesn't matter one bit to you. I love my TFSA though. For me being incorporated and having a low personal tax rate it's a better savings tools than RRSPs since I don't need tax savings now so might as well defer the savings until later. 

[sweep the leg]

It's certainly good news for investors. It remains to be seen how it will affect government revenue in the future though. There are good points on both sides and I don't know which is right.

[17to85]

It's certainly good news for investors. It remains to be seen how it will affect government revenue in the future though. There are good points on both sides and I don't know which is right.

I feel that anything that promotes savings is a good thing because as a society we simply don't save enough. With the tax free aspect of earnings on them as well it should promote some investment which is good for the economy as a whole right? I don't think you can worry about possible lost revenue (god I hate that term) in the future. It's good for the people so to me it's a good thing. 

[Atomic]

Mulcair has promised a federal 15 dollar minimum wage. Am I crazy or does that seem like an awful idea????

[17to85]

Mulcair has promised a federal 15 dollar minimum wage. Am I crazy or does that seem like an awful idea????

Just terrible. You can't have a one size fits all minimum wage across the country, some areas are more expensive to live and have higher wages, others are cheaper and wages are reflected in that. ******* NDP living in their dream world not the real world. Surprised he's not saying "a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage"

[Mr Dee]

I just read that now, about the $15/hour, (it starts at 12, 15 by 2019). That does seem to be a scary proposal but many countries do have a higher min. wage and are doing quite well.

What is interesting is that Canada should be looking at what other countries are doing, especially in the area of Health Care. We have a lot to learn in this area and it may be worth our while to study this issue because there surely must be better ways. (Even taking into consideration the Country's size).

[Fraser]

The only thing I would say is that it's not always as simple as running a deficit or not running a deficit. For example, the Conservatives planned to be deficit free, but with the economy hitting the shitter there's no way for that to happen now barring big tax hikes, which in a recession probably not the greatest idea. With everything being so global these days there are less things a government can do in order to avoid situations like this.

It might not be but when you run 5 for 5 its hard argue its a statistical anomaly or give a reason why every year you specifically had to run that deficit in the past but how it will be differnt going forward. I agree they need to run one now. I do not agree that they have needed to run one for 5 years. Add in 2 years of a recession (if he gets reelected) and that will be 9 years of straight deficits over a business cycle and a half. Not really set up for a Nobel prize in economic management.

[Fraser]

Fraser, question since you mentioned working as a financial planner, TFSAs, raising the limit to $10,000, good or bad?

I don't actually do that anymore I work in commercial finance but my take is this.

It's an excellent tool. Especially for younger people.

Most people don't use it correctly and use it for low risk short term savings. When they should use it for higher risk long term savings.

Promoting savings is a good thing.

[rebusrankin]

Thanks Fraser,

 

That actually is my take but that's not my professional field so I wanted to ask.

[The Unknown Poster]

Sweep - I have no idea what role the Union had in the share plan. My experience with unions has been mostly bad.

When I was young, I worked for a company that was unionized and we made minimum wage. And paid Union dues. So in reality we made less than minimum wage.

My current Union has given people bad advice at times. They once gave me bad advice too but I rejected it. The one thing they did for me was argue that I could not be sent home without pay without prior notice. So I ended up getting paid for four hours.

During the last negotiation there was some push back from

Members about the unions paranoia and secrecy and lack of communication. But the Union leadership is essentially a dictatorship. So there's very little you can do.

On the flip side the compNy once offered a terrible contract. It was so bad it actually made many employees who didn't care suddenly care. So you wonder if there was no Union would the company treat it's employees that bad or was the offer a very low starting point because there was a Union and everything has to be negotiated.

My friend works for a company with no Union. Has better sick benefits. Better vacation higher wages. Way better bonuses. More opportunity for advancement. Share plan. Pension. Etc. They just deleted his position and offered him an opportunity to move eleeware in the company or a $70,000+ severance.

So I can't say I'm a fan of unions.

[The Unknown Poster]

I think what Fraser is saying is we should vote for Harper and insist he keeps running deficits.