Canada's Opposition Parties Vow to Bring Down Government, 1 month into its term...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
I fail to see how an election would happen if the opposition can form a coalition. I also fail to see how Harper would win such an election given that he would be responsible for triggering an unnecessary election.

You think Tory MPs will vote non confidence on themselves?

Anyway, I'd put cash on Harper not wanting an election, but feeling he could win a future majority from the opposition benches better than from a minority government going into a severe recession/depression.

Desirable goals, in order:

1. The Liberals actually pull this craptastic idea off, and form a coalition requiring the support of the Bloq for the Speech from the Throne. Begin sharpening the rhetoric, and the knives.

2. An immediate election triggered by the Bloq when most Canadians have not yet been hammered by the worst of the coming economic storm.

The goal is a majority that they narrowly missed the last time. The addition of anti-Bloq sentiment in the RoC is counted on to carry the wave.

3. The government survives, but the public sector unions are tamed for the likely length of a government, and the financing of opponents are thrown into some disarray for the inevitable election amid gloom.

No government in it's right mind would be looking forward to facing the electorate in 18 to 36 months and at a time of the oppositions choosing, but if you have to you might as well set the table as best you can to avoid a total wipeout.

-

I figure Harper wants to lose, now. It's the best way out of what is likely to be a Campbell like scenario if he has to preside over the beginning of the coming mess.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


If the non-confidence motion passes we go to election. Simple as that.

No. it's not.

The PM does not dissolve Parliament or sign the writ.

[notyoueither]

The more I think about it...

This is a motion of confidence on himself with poison pills attached. Harper does not want the status quo. He needs out of it.

Accept his government on his terms, or take on the mess for themselves.

I wonder if the Liberals will be dumb enough to walk into it.

[Ben Kenobi]

This is a motion of confidence on himself with poison pills attached. Harper does not want the status quo. He needs out of it.

Now you see why this is so brilliant.

Welcome to the fold NYE.

Accept his government on his terms, or take on the mess for themselves.

I wonder if the Liberals will be dumb enough to walk into it.

You get part of it.

He's aiming to destroy the Bloc. This will finish them off.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

You get part of it.

He's aiming to destroy the Bloc. This will finish them off.

I fail to see how anything short of switching to a PR system would destroy the block. The people who vote for the Bloc probably don't care what the Bloc actually does as long as they keep up the Quebeqois rhetoric.

[Ben Kenobi]

I fail to see how anything short of switching to a PR system would destroy the block. The people who vote for the Bloc probably don't care what the Bloc actually does as long as they keep up the Quebeqois rhetoric.

Why on earth would PR destroy the Bloc? Quite the contrary.

Losing 85 percent of their funding will destroy them.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Why on earth would PR destroy the Bloc? Quite the contrary.

6% of the vote, 15% of the seats? Something like that.

[Ben Kenobi]

6% of the vote, 15% of the seats? Something like that.

You'd do it Canada wide? Good luck getting Quebec to agree with that.

And it's 10 percent of the vote, 20 percent of the seats. So they would still get roughly 30 seats.

[Sharpe]

Harper has committed to an economic stimulus package...

Flaherty says "No further stimulus in the works"

I will admit he did also say "if we need to do more, because of the deteriorating economic circumstances, we will do more.”

He actually thinks the tax cuts already in place are a stimulus... I'm sure that wasn't what most economists or other politicians had in mind though.

And people are wondering why the opposition are saying there isn't any new stimulus..... because there isn't

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wflahertystaff1128/BNStory/Front

[notyoueither]

What would you do, Sharpe?

[Wezil]

NYE - I think you and I aren't too far apart on this.

Originally posted by notyoueither

At the same time, I find it quite humourous that the Bloq and Liberals are crying foul over a cynical manipulation of the poilitcal system. Were it not for such behaviour the Bloq would not exist, and the Liberals would not have anywhere near the experience with government that they do.

The C's will be making the "manipulation" argument big time over the next week. A pox on all their houses.

[Sharpe]

What would you do, Sharpe?

Well, first off - something probably has to be done for the auto companies. Admittedly if the Americans do nothing for them, they are doomed anyhow, but if they do something and we do nothing, they will likely shutdown virtually all of their plants here - with would lead to an enormous loss of jobs directly and a lot more indirect jobs (and put key companies like Magna and others in trouble).

Second, they need to spend on infrastructure. That is usually a good way to help boost the economy and goodness knows - there are many areas that infrastructure has been badly neglected (water systems, roads, bridges/overpasses, getting cell systems and cable more out to the rural regions).

Third, they need to beef up the EI benefits - particularly the length of time you can get them as it will likely take people a lot longer to find jobs in this current economic climate.

Fourth, they need to start figuring out a way to shift our economy more directed towards Asia (although increased EU and other trade would be a good idea too). Just get us less dependant on the US economy which is in for a long struggle and a lot of restructuring (much more than us) and Canada's interests will likely be ignored and US interests favored there while they struggle out of a deep recession.

Just don't sell assets while they are in their depressed state - that doesn't help Canada at all - and tax cuts aren't a stimulus by themselves (and they are actually one of the least effective types of stimulus as they so favor the rich who don't spend as much in Canada). Also the program cuts and "savings" they are planning are somewhat of an anti-stimulus.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Sharpe
Also the program cuts and "savings" they are planning are somewhat of an anti-stimulus.

This is what I have been hearing. The economy needs money put into it, not taken out.


If the government is going to spend money I like the idea of infrastructure spending. There are many projects on the books and ready to go. Let's get them underway while planning is made for future works (if needed).

I'm not crazy about auto industry support at this time however. I think we need to wait and see what the US does on this front.

[Ben Kenobi]

Deficits are the most important thing. We've fought hard, and for a long time to get out of deficit. We can't afford to go back into deficit.

Program cuts should be made in areas that the Federal Government doesn't need to be. Things like the CBC, CHRC and the gun registry should be slashed and left to die.

Well, first off - something probably has to be done for the auto companies.

Why? Let them die so Toyota can pick at the carcass. Any bailout is pissing money down a pit.

(and put key companies like Magna and others in trouble).

So Belinda Stronach has to cut back on the plastic surgery? Sounds good to me.

Second, they need to spend on infrastructure. That is usually a good way to help boost the economy and goodness knows - there are many areas that infrastructure has been badly neglected (water systems, roads, bridges/overpasses, getting cell systems and cable more out to the rural regions).

Agreed, but I'd favour an improvement of the Trans Canada.

There is no reason why we cannot have interstate standards with 4 lanes to connect to all the US interstates.

This can be done without increasing taxes, just ensure that every single penny of gas taxes goes to fund transportation infrastructure, and not Michaelle Jean's box tickets to the Toronto Opera.

Third, they need to beef up the EI benefits - particularly the length of time you can get them as it will likely take people a lot longer to find jobs in this current economic climate.

The EI fund is huge. Again, it needs to come out of general revenue, so that EI funds paid in are only used to pay out EI.

Fourth, they need to start figuring out a way to shift our economy more directed towards Asia

Development of Prince Rupert and the entire HWY 16 corridor would be the most important thing. The problem isn't trade, but the fact that our ports are so small.

Just get us less dependant on the US economy which is in for a long struggle and a lot of restructuring (much more than us) and Canada's interests will likely be ignored and US interests favored there while they struggle out of a deep recession.

It would be in our best interest to seize as much marketshare in industries where we are efficient as American producers go down. Lumber is a huge opportunity if Canadians can have the foresight, because our production costs are the lowest in the world.

Just don't sell assets while they are in their depressed state - that doesn't help Canada at all

Yes, sell MORE assets, crap that the Feds never should have owned in the first place.

- and tax cuts aren't a stimulus by themselves (and they are actually one of the least effective types of stimulus as they so favor the rich who don't spend as much in Canada). Also the program cuts and "savings" they are planning are somewhat of an anti-stimulus.

Tax cuts are always a good thing. Look at it this way. Bailouts are just pissing money down a hole. Tax relief for Canadians gets them to spend more because they aren't paying 50 percent of their income to the Queen. You want to stimulate the economy? Put more money in people's pocket by cutting taxes.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Sharpe


Well, first off - something probably has to be done for the auto companies. Admittedly if the Americans do nothing for them, they are doomed anyhow, but if they do something and we do nothing, they will likely shutdown virtually all of their plants here - with would lead to an enormous loss of jobs directly and a lot more indirect jobs (and put key companies like Magna and others in trouble).

This is total nonsense. The 25 billion they want won't keep them open longer than a few months. shuttling production around for political purposes would only accelerate that. Not to mention that the automakers need to die anyway. **** 'em. Let them go.

Second, they need to spend on infrastructure. That is usually a good way to help boost the economy and goodness knows - there are many areas that infrastructure has been badly neglected (water systems, roads, bridges/overpasses, getting cell systems and cable more out to the rural regions).

The fiscal multiplier from spending increases in Canada is now strongly NEGATIVE. Perotti (2005). People in Canada are still very sensitive to budget deficits. They know that current deficits must be paid for with future taxes. This is basic Ricardian equivalence. Therefore they cut back their own spending in anticipation of future tax increases to pay for spending increase.

Third, they need to beef up the EI benefits - particularly the length of time you can get them as it will likely take people a lot longer to find jobs in this current economic climate.

This is eminently reasonable.

Fourth, they need to start figuring out a way to shift our economy more directed towards Asia (although increased EU and other trade would be a good idea too). Just get us less dependant on the US economy which is in for a long struggle and a lot of restructuring (much more than us) and Canada's interests will likely be ignored and US interests favored there while they struggle out of a deep recession.

This is babble. Central planning is impossible because nobody (particularly no yahoo on the internet) is able to accurately forecast stuff like this.

Just don't sell assets while they are in their depressed state - that doesn't help Canada at all - and tax cuts aren't a stimulus by themselves (and they are actually one of the least effective types of stimulus as they so favor the rich who don't spend as much in Canada). Also the program cuts and "savings" they are planning are somewhat of an anti-stimulus.

Again, Perotti 2005: fiscal multiplier from tax cuts in Canada after twelve quarters is 1.75; fiscal multiplier from spending increases after 12 quarters is -2.25

Not to mention the fact that tax cuts don't have to "favour the rich"; they can be tilted whatever way you want. See, for example, the US tax rebate cheques. Though the US gov't might have wanted to read Perotti as well; according to his model, the fiscal multiplier from tax cuts in the US is actually mildly negative and from spending increases is mildly positive (though both effects are virtually 0)

You're obviously just about as economically literate as our politicians. Congratulations!

EDIT: wrote "spending" in one instance where I meant "taxes"