Election 2015

[Fraser]

I prefer a comsumption taxes to income taxes. Promotes savings.

[The Unknown Poster]

I prefer a comsumption taxes to income taxes. Promotes savings.

I would LOVE to keep a lot more of the money I make.  And see higher taxes on other items.  If I want to buy a new escalade, Im paying a ton of tax, but thats my choice.  And guess what, if Im taking home more of my paycheck, I probably would buy that Escalade.

[kelownabomberfan]

I'm not pushing anybody's agenda...

Ok...

just pointing out the what we know about Harper, and most of all the information isn't good. This differs from your fear of what the other parties "might" do.

There is plenty of evidence out there about what Harper is all about, all you have to do is look.

And then you totally contradict yourself. Sorry, but fear-mongering on Harper is promoting an agenda, whether you want to admit it or not.

[Mr Dee]

Them's the facts as they are KBF...spin them any way you want.

[tacklewasher]

Them's the facts as they are KBF...spin them any way you want.

Can you list some of them? All I've seen you say is that there are facts. But nor what they are. What has you upset with Harper?

[kelownabomberfan]

Them's the facts as they are KBF...spin them any way you want.

You are doing a fine job of that yourself. I love it when leftists use the word "facts", and then go ahead and start spouting a bunch of manufactured garbage instead. And even if there is a kernel of truth to what you are saying, you still aren't telling me why the other guys are better. And if you can't, then people 99 times out of 100 will pick the devil they know.

[Mr Dee]

Them's the facts as they are KBF...spin them any way you want.

Can you list some of them? All I've seen you say is that there are facts. But nor what they are. What has you upset with Harper?

I was answering K's post, but I know you really don't have to ask that question. Start with the fact that this will be a r e a l l y long election. And costly. Why?

But you know as well as I do, that if I list anything against Harper, it will just be dismissed as propaganda and "fear-mongering" so I only encourage Canadians to do their own homework before voting...you certainly have enough time.

[kelownabomberfan]

But you know as well as I do, that if I list anything against Harper, it will just be dismissed as propaganda and "fear-mongering" so I only encourage Canadians to do their own homework before voting...you certainly have enough time.

And you know as well as I do that just listing negative stuff that you are fed by the NDP propaganda machine isn't enough to make people vote for Mulcair. The NDP always wants to take the easy road, and point fingers rather than say what they would do better. And that's a recipe for failure.

[The Unknown Poster]

I think people can have opinions but they should be better than personal insults or fear mongering.  I havent heard very much that is reasonable in regards to Anti-Harper.  Most of the average poeple on social media just do the "Stop this man before its too late" or "save democracy by voting out Harper" without giving any context to any of that.  Like is Harper really going to destroy the world?  Is Canada going to turn into a dictatorship?  Ofcourse not.  So they need to stop with the hyperbole and look at facts.

 

I used to vote Liberal.  I changed my mind.  I now vote Conservative.  But I can change my mind.  But not with these tactics.

 

Why is it a long election?  Because its a good strategy for the party in power I guess.  Didnt the Liberals have an election that was almost as long?  Parties always use whatever they can to their advantage.  The first party that decides to simply be as fair and impartial as they can will be the first one to lose.

 

The NDP have the unions in their back pocket, campaigning for them, spending my union dues.  But thats allowed.  The NDP take advantage of that.

[rebusrankin]

One thing with the election call, it puts a limit on third party spending (like unions). Likely stops what happened in Ontario, third parties there spent more in the last election than the three parties did combined.

[kelownabomberfan]

I still don't get why unions get to spend so much money they take from members' cheques on political ads. Wouldn't the members be better served by lower union dues, rather than political statements being made on their behalf that they may not even agree with? I don't get how the system allows this. I also don't get how the NDP thought it was totally cool to house union members who weren't even working for the NDP in their office in Toronto, rent free. That office is paid for with donations, that taxpayers give credits out for, and here's union members just sitting and working in NDP offices. That was a FACT, and it should piss everyone off.

[The Unknown Poster]

I still don't get why unions get to spend so much money they take from members' cheques on political ads. Wouldn't the members be better served by lower union dues, rather than political statements being made on their behalf that they may not even agree with? I don't get how the system allows this. I also don't get how the NDP thought it was totally cool to house union members who weren't even working for the NDP in their office in Toronto, rent free. That office is paid for with donations, that taxpayers give credits out for, and here's union members just sitting and working in NDP offices. That was a FACT, and it should piss everyone off.

Drives me crazy.  I guess the argument is, the money they spend on politics is to benefit the union members.  But I wish there was a law to cap it or reduce it or make it public what was being spent.

 

I attended one of my union meetings during a recent provincial election and at the end of the meeting, the executive implored the members to do everything they could to get the NDP re-elected.  It wasnt even "this is business" they were agonized over the idea of the NDP possibly losing.  It really bothered me.

 

But there is no talking to my union.  ive never met a more paranoid, mean spirited bunch of people.  During our last contract negotiation, I attended a meeting and they brought in a top guy from Ontario.  He belittled management...and not the BOD or executive teams, the front line managers, many of whom used to be in our union and many people in our union aspired to move up to that front line management.  Not to mention the managers were also unionized.  They also belittled other unions.  It was disgraceful.  They are incredibly secretive and wont tell the members anything.  When asked why they couldnt email us the result of recent talks (email to our work email), they were incredulous..."How stupid do you think we are?" the union president asked.  "The company will read the emails."  "So what," I asked.  "Im pretty sure the company knows what they agreed to in the meeting they were in."

 

Just a miserable, paranoid bunch

[The Unknown Poster]

Its actually amazing the the NDP dont win every election with the unions in their back pocket. 

[Rich]

 

I still don't get why unions get to spend so much money they take from members' cheques on political ads. Wouldn't the members be better served by lower union dues, rather than political statements being made on their behalf that they may not even agree with? I don't get how the system allows this. I also don't get how the NDP thought it was totally cool to house union members who weren't even working for the NDP in their office in Toronto, rent free. That office is paid for with donations, that taxpayers give credits out for, and here's union members just sitting and working in NDP offices. That was a FACT, and it should piss everyone off.

Drives me crazy.  I guess the argument is, the money they spend on politics is to benefit the union members.  But I wish there was a law to cap it or reduce it or make it public what was being spent.

 

I attended one of my union meetings during a recent provincial election and at the end of the meeting, the executive implored the members to do everything they could to get the NDP re-elected.  It wasnt even "this is business" they were agonized over the idea of the NDP possibly losing.  It really bothered me.

 

But there is no talking to my union.  ive never met a more paranoid, mean spirited bunch of people.  During our last contract negotiation, I attended a meeting and they brought in a top guy from Ontario.  He belittled management...and not the BOD or executive teams, the front line managers, many of whom used to be in our union and many people in our union aspired to move up to that front line management.  Not to mention the managers were also unionized.  They also belittled other unions.  It was disgraceful.  They are incredibly secretive and wont tell the members anything.  When asked why they couldnt email us the result of recent talks (email to our work email), they were incredulous..."How stupid do you think we are?" the union president asked.  "The company will read the emails."  "So what," I asked.  "Im pretty sure the company knows what they agreed to in the meeting they were in."

 

Just a miserable, paranoid bunch

 

 

I am certainly no fan of unions or the NDP, but you can't cap union contributions from unions without doing the same to the conservatives and business where they receive their contributions. That is just how the system works and whose interests the parties are supporting. I agree with making all donations public though.  Everyone should know what unions and businesses support what parties and to what degree.  That would be good transparency.

 

The argument about whether or not it is a good use of union dues is of course a completely different subject, and I'm willing to bet opinions differ wildly amongst the union membership.

 

In the last federal election, the conservatives received $9.09 of public funding per vote, the liberals $8.67 and the NDP $8.26.

 

Of course the gross dollars are hugely disparate as the conservatives received many more votes than the other two parties.  

[The Unknown Poster]

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

[kelownabomberfan]

When asked why they couldnt email us the result of recent talks (email to our work email), they were incredulous..."How stupid do you think we are?" the union president asked.  "The company will read the emails."  "So what," I asked.  "Im pretty sure the company knows what they agreed to in the meeting they were in."

 

Just a miserable, paranoid bunch

LOL - what he meant was "the Company will tell you what was really said and done, as opposed to the massive pile of bullshit we feed you".

Yeah unions as they stand now really have past their best before date. I get that they are still needed to some extent but on the other hand, they really seem to only serve to perpetuate the union bureaucracy rather than protect and serve members. The expenditure of millions of member dues on political campaigns in support of the NDP really is sickening and shouldn't be allowed. No special interest group should be able to spend money that it receives in this way, in support of any party. It's just morally wrong. Just like watching the BCTF here in BC spend millions of dollars supporting the BC NDP, all because they know the BC NDP will bend over and give them whatever they want, at the expense of taxpayers, students and parents. Barf.

[Rich]

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

 

I agree with this, but that is completely different than there being a law to cap political contributions from unions.

[kelownabomberfan]

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

The same concept should go for government unions that require workers to join unions as part of their job. People should have the freedom to "opt out" of their union and keep their union dues in their pockets. It shouldn't be mandatory membership. Of course, if this actually happened, most government unions would collapse almost over night.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

 

I agree with this, but that is completely different than there being a law to cap political contributions from unions.

 

I meant cap how much of my dues can be spent on arbitrary things.  My dues should fund the union, not the political whims of the executive.

[Rich]

 

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

The same concept should go for government unions that require workers to join unions as part of their job. People should have the freedom to "opt out" of their union and keep their union dues in their pockets. It shouldn't be mandatory membership. Of course, if this actually happened, most government unions would collapse almost over night.

 

 

I'm not sure about that.  Many people in unions are just as passionate for them as many people are against them.  I've been forced to be in some unions in some places that I've worked, and there are many hardcore pro union people that work there.

 

Also, if the government unions dissolved, the pay and benefits that many civil servants get would be reduced to be in-line with industry averages, so why would they get rid of their unions?  Government is one work place that isn't there to turn a profit and can't close up shop if pay and benefits don't make fiscal sense.  It is the perfect place for unions to thrive.

[The Unknown Poster]

 

When asked why they couldnt email us the result of recent talks (email to our work email), they were incredulous..."How stupid do you think we are?" the union president asked.  "The company will read the emails."  "So what," I asked.  "Im pretty sure the company knows what they agreed to in the meeting they were in."

 

Just a miserable, paranoid bunch

LOL - what he meant was "the Company will tell you what was really said and done, as opposed to the massive pile of bullshit we feed you".

Yeah unions as they stand now really have past their best before date. I get that they are still needed to some extent but on the other hand, they really seem to only serve to perpetuate the union bureaucracy rather than protect and serve members. The expenditure of millions of member dues on political campaigns in support of the NDP really is sickening and shouldn't be allowed. No special interest group should be able to spend money that it receives in this way, in support of any party. It's just morally wrong. Just like watching the BCTF here in BC spend millions of dollars supporting the BC NDP, all because they know the BC NDP will bend over and give them whatever they want, at the expense of taxpayers, students and parents. Barf.

 

 

They are very anti-technology.  Its almost absurd.  Like if I email them wanting a specific answer, they reply "call me".  Their website looks like garbage and they dont have the CBA's online.  It took them months to actually print up the booklet form of the new agreement.  I asked why it was taking so long and got some condescending response about how "these things take time".  I replied "I could take it to staples and have it done in an hour."

 

When I asked why the agreement wasnt on the website "We dont do that and no union does that."  As if the agreement is a secret.  Except, as I pointed out, their expired agreements were online.  doh.  We just have a terrible, awful executive.  Before I ended up on the outs, the president would routinely bad mouth people to me.  Very gossipy.  Every meeting I've been to, they ask for an email address.  So I ask why they bother collecting that if they never intent to use it.  "We prefer to have face to face meetings".  I said "you realise that five minutes into the first group meeting, everyone back at the office knows what the details are, right?  Because we all text, email, phone and talk to each other."  Send a ******* group email and pretend its at least 1999.  Disgraceful. 

[The Unknown Poster]

 

 

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

The same concept should go for government unions that require workers to join unions as part of their job. People should have the freedom to "opt out" of their union and keep their union dues in their pockets. It shouldn't be mandatory membership. Of course, if this actually happened, most government unions would collapse almost over night.

 

 

I'm not sure about that.  Many people in unions are just as passionate for them as many people are against them.  I've been forced to be in some unions in some places that I've worked, and there are many hardcore pro union people that work there.

 

Also, if the government unions dissolved, the pay and benefits that many civil servants get would be reduced to be in-line with industry averages, so why would they get rid of their unions?  Government is one work place that isn't there to turn a profit and can't close up shop if pay and benefits don't make fiscal sense.  It is the perfect place for unions to thrive.

 

I actually agree with this.  If a workplace is unionized, then all employees should be in it.  I was part of one where we had to opt in to being a member but if we didnt, we still paid dues and were still represented.  We just werent official members.  You have to protect people from themselves.  If a workplace is negotiating collectively, you cant allow for X amount to sabotage it or be enticed by management to sabotage it.  All or none. 

 

Im not fully anti-union.  Just that unions seem to think its still 1912.  And it isnt.  I sat in an informal "disciplinary" meeting once and the childish insults and smarmy remarks were almost unbearable.  I was embarrassed.  Collective negotiation is great.  When it's done properly by intelligent adults.

[bigg jay]

 

 

 

if I own a business, its my decision how I spend the money.  Unions arent privately owned.  They are supposed to serve their members.  Let them let their members vote on it.  They wont because they dont want to risk members choosing to forgo the political payments in favour of lower dues.  At the very least, give us details as to where our money is going.  And let me choose where my portion goes.  Let Conservative minded union members ear mark their portion of dues to the Conservatives.  See how that goes over...lol

The same concept should go for government unions that require workers to join unions as part of their job. People should have the freedom to "opt out" of their union and keep their union dues in their pockets. It shouldn't be mandatory membership. Of course, if this actually happened, most government unions would collapse almost over night.

 

 

I'm not sure about that.  Many people in unions are just as passionate for them as many people are against them.  I've been forced to be in some unions in some places that I've worked, and there are many hardcore pro union people that work there.

 

Also, if the government unions dissolved, the pay and benefits that many civil servants get would be reduced to be in-line with industry averages, so why would they get rid of their unions?  Government is one work place that isn't there to turn a profit and can't close up shop if pay and benefits don't make fiscal sense.  It is the perfect place for unions to thrive.

 

I actually agree with this.  If a workplace is unionized, then all employees should be in it.  I was part of one where we had to opt in to being a member but if we didnt, we still paid dues and were still represented.  We just werent official members.  You have to protect people from themselves.  If a workplace is negotiating collectively, you cant allow for X amount to sabotage it or be enticed by management to sabotage it.  All or none. 

 

Im not fully anti-union.  Just that some unions seem to think its still 1912.  And it isnt.  I sat in an informal "disciplinary" meeting once and the childish insults and smarmy remarks were almost unbearable.  I was embarrassed.  Collective negotiation is great.  When it's done properly by intelligent adults.

 

 

FYP

 

I'm unionized in my current job, and have been for the majority of my previous jobs as well.  Some unions are much better/worse than others, it all depends on the executive.  I've been part of my current union twice now (different locals) and it's night and day.  My previous stint sounds very similar to what you currently have... f*cking useless would the most polite way I could describe them, but I'm happy (comparatively speaking) with how my current local works.

[The Unknown Poster]

And they dont want change because the old leadership would never be able to function in a new world.  They hand pick the executive.  Its a joke.  What a great gig.  Employee funded dictatorship.  I noticed in the minutes of one meeting that the president sole-sourced her office being professionally painted.  I wanted to ask if she had three quotes to show us but it wasnt worth the battle.

[basslicker]

I'd like to see more written about the cost of the NDP's promises. I'll give you two: National Day care and increasing foreign aid. They say day care will be 5 billion a year. Let's accept that for now. To increase foreign aid to .7% of GDP is another 9.3 billion. That is an increase of 14.3 billion in spending on only two promises. Where does that $ come from?

The scariest thing is that there many people out there who think it's perfectly OK to jack up taxes and send like crazy. Usually people who don't have any money of their own.

That much in foreign aid increase?????

Charity starts at home and there are tens of thousands right HERE who could be aided by that cash.