溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: Layton and the NDP's Surge [打印本頁]

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-29 11:51 標題: Layton and the NDP's Surge

With the federal election only a few days away, all signs are pointing to yet another minority Conservative government, with Jack Layton and the NDP as the official opposition party. Obviously, Ignatieff is the biggest loser here, and I would personally expect nothing less than an immediate resignation as the Liberal leader after the election is done.

I am not really surprised by Ignatieff's demise, but what really surprises me though is Layton and the NDP's surge in the polls. Are people really supportive of him and the NDP, as polls suggest that Canadians think Layton would make for the best PM? Or are they simply fed up with the Liberals, but can't find themselves voting for the Conservatives? (This is also supported by the huge drop in support for the Liberals over the past few weeks.)

Personally, the way I see this is -- if Layton and the NDP were to ever become Canada's next PM (probably won't happen in this election, but it might in the next), The NDP philosophies would mean that they'd be spending money everywhere, and I am not convinced that the economy and businesses could stay strong under an NDP leadership. Canada would be very dai wok as the economy would tank and our national debt mounts. But at this point, an NDP PM in the next election is no longer a pipe dream.

What do you guys think? (I'd even be interested to hear what our 3 musketeers have to say on this matter, although I already have a good idea of what Peter boy would probably say.

)

-Lik

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-29 12:14

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-4-29 12:18 編輯

The country is basically a one party rule now. The Liberal is falling out of favor more quickly now than expected by most. But do Canadians really want the NDP to be in power? NDP is just not practical for the country, as the nation is already in big debt.

The Conservatives, even though they are autocratic and secretive, is probably the only party that can form a majority in the near term. This maybe a good thing for the country, since there will be less bickering in the parliament.

hahaha, Harper is forced to stay and can't attend his masters wedding.

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-29 12:58

what I think is.
1) I won't vote for a party just because the party want to be majority.
2) Sometimes, it is good to have left Wing rules the country for a while.  To balance out the society. If the government is favor towards business for a long time, of course, the labour force will be scarified.  Then it is better to have a social government comes in to swing it back.  so that rich won't get too rich, poor will get some help. For example, look at HK.
so, in short term it may hurt, for long term it is good for the country
3) I rather to have minority government than majority for now.  We are in the peaceful time, there is not much difference having minority or majority.  And indeed, it is good to have minority so that the government will not be over power and being watched. i.e. less corruption.  LOOK AT CHINA..

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-29 13:01

One party rule? Do you even have eyes? Poll numbers indicate that support for the 3 major parties are somewhere along:

35% for Conservatives
30% for NDP
21-ish% for Liberals

Real politicians in democratic societies are like hounds -- they have sharp noses that smell what the voters want. In democratic societies such as Canada, there are more than several built-in systems to keep everything in check and balance. Pseudo-one party rule (a la a majority government) will only occur if that is what Canadians want. And even then, voters have to power to overthrow the government should it step out of line.

而且，你估學大陸咁一言堂就即係好？事情要有討論先至陳述到利弊，唔係阿爺一句話點就點。

話你無質素就果然係無質素啦～成世人都俾我睇死～

-Lik

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 13:10

到自由黨或新民主黨有機會做大多數政府時,
你估佢地會唔會自己放棄幾個MP位,
成立一個 '更好' '更平衡' 的小數政府.

這只是冇能力成為執政黨時的 '謊言' '廢話' !

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-29 13:13

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-4-29 13:18 編輯

Democracy does not solve corruption at all, examples: India, Greece and Philippines etc

Democracy does not solve lousy economy and big national debts, examples: Japan, UK, Canada, US, Greece, Portugal, Spain etc

For China, at this stage of their development, their current system is probably more suitable.

The Chinese need a period of stability, to quickly and efficiently develop their economy.
Examples: Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and Singapore. All these places saw rapid rising living standards during periods with relatively little democracy.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 13:33

回復 3# rainbow-davie

你是打工還是做老闆?

我正在一生意, 比工會壓到冇錢廉, 打算close咗佢, 會有200人無咗份工, 咁對工人階級是好事嗎?

相反, 另一沒有工會的一間, 由於要在市場找好的員工, 薪金及福利都十分好, 由於沒有工會的無理支持, 員工更負責任, 工作效率更高, 生意亦更好.

聰明的virus是唔會殺死個host.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-4-29 13:43

Although I support voting, but certainly not with this frequency...

I won't "risk" to vote for a coalition government if we are having the minority parties with "this" quality.

作者: Prelude 時間: 2011-4-29 13:46

Let's bring back the topic to Canada.

minority government = another vote 1 or 2 years from now.
It looks like it's going to be minority government this time anyways.
Harper didn't even have a chance to do work while as a minority government, I would suggest to give him majority government for a term to see any evil side of him first. If he is bad, we can then vote him out.

minority government is not working for Canada, as we have seen from the recent history.
Layton keeps on promising give money out here and there, and people actually trust him, which I found it funny. Where does he get the money from in a slow economy like now? Increase tax now will only reduce revenue. Borrow more money?

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-29 13:56

聰明的virus是唔會殺死個host.
satil 發表於 2011-4-29 13:33

好一句「聰明的virus是唔會殺死個host」。

以前經濟起飛嘅美國，工會的確有對整個社會非常有貢獻同有意義。佢確保工人階級都可以得到合理嘅待遇，而唔係淨係俾資本家剝削。講真，其實今日嘅香港亦好需要有返啲有勢力嘅工會來幫打工仔爭取返啲權益。

但今日嘅美加社會，大嘅、太有勢力嘅工會的確係成日都貪得無厭同阻住個地球轉。最好嘅 example 就係美國汽車工業嘅 UAW。淨係識得吸血，最後咪搞到Big3差啲全部嵌包散？響加拿大，CUPE，Teamster呢兩家都係比較接近貪得無厭果一類。而 locally 來講，BCGEU 其實唔算太惡，而 BCTF 雖然賤（因為成日搵啲學生來做禍參），但其實都唔能夠怪佢地貪心，因為（省）政府其實真係 cut budget cut得好緊要，而教育真係一樣唔慳得嘅野來。

不過呢幾句其實全部 OT 晒。都係講返聯邦大選把啦～

-力

作者: Lik 時間: 2011-4-29 14:17

minority government = another vote 1 or 2 years from now.
It looks like it's going to be minority government this time anyways.
Harper didn't even have a chance to do work while as a minority government, I would suggest to give him majority government for a term to see any evil side of him first. If he is bad, we can then vote him out.

minority government is not working for Canada, as we have seen from the recent history.
Layton keeps on promising give money out here and there, and people actually trust him, which I found it funny. Where does he get the money from in a slow economy like now? Increase tax now will only reduce revenue. Borrow more money?
Prelude 發表於 2011-4-29 13:46

Even with another minority government, I think we're going to see this one last a bit longer (perhaps something closer to 3 years, if not over 3 years?). The federal government parties are fully aware of how fed up Canadians are with frequent elections. Harper, in particular, has been milking this point for all it is worth to seek a majority government. My personal take on the why we are having this election in the first place is because of yet another power struggle and pressure from within the Liberal party. Since the Liberal government collapsed in 2006, Liberal leadership has been one big mess. Dion stepped up at first, only to be overthrown by the power-hungry Ignatieff and Rae. As it turned out, Ignatieff is completely clueless and useless as a leader, so the Liberal party big wigs are probably serving him some sort of ultimatum to give this PM thing one last shot, or bow out in disgrace. Caught between a rock and a hard place, Ignatieff has no choice but to stir up another federal election even though he knows full well that he has no chance of winning Prime Ministership at all.
While I am not in strong favour of a Conservative majority, I don't see any significant harm in it either. If Harper is reckless with his majority government, Canadians can always clean house in the next election and the Conservatives will be doomed for at least 2 elections. That is how the democracy game works.

Are minority governments really such a bad thing though? Yes, it is not as effective / efficient as a majority government, but the policies that result from one is more balanced and moderate, and therefore will cater to a larger audience.

Lastly, I totally agree on your point with the NDP promising freebies and handouts everywhere. Every time I hear their candidates preach this crap, I wanna ask them -- how do you think we are going to pay for this? Where is the money coming from?

-Lik

p.s. If you pay attention, you'll see that throughout the post, I have never diu-ed you. It just goes to show that even if we were to disagree, as long as you are not spewing out crap, I will treat you as a reasonable person.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-4-29 14:42

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-4-29 14:48 編輯

If Layton is the Liberal leader, we don't need to be frustrated in the election...

Liberal 中無大將 Ignatieff作先鋒... A war of wasting bullets...

作者: blue20ae 時間: 2011-4-29 15:21

what I think is.
....
2) Sometimes, it is good to have left Wing rules the country for a while. To balance out the society. If the government is favor towards business for a long time, of course, the labour force will be scarified. Then it is better to have a social government comes in to swing it back.
rainbow-davie 發表於 2011-4-29 12:58

Today's world is flat.  If you press the business, they will simply move to another  country.

Just remember, if you have RRSP or any saving at all, you are a business owner.  NDP's plan to tax and spend will only move money from your left pocket to your right pocket...if you are lucky.

HK's problem is not because the government is business friendly.  HK government is simply lazy.  They don't do anything. The $6K distribution is a very good example on how lazy they are.

作者: blue20ae 時間: 2011-4-29 15:25

回復 12# lo_pak

...not only bullets, it is a wast of $300 million of our money.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-29 15:28

本帖最後由 satil 於 2011-4-29 15:33 編輯

由始至終‘福利’需要錢，政府錢從何來？從你我的稅款。
你我的稅款從何而來？從我們辛勞工作的薪金。
沒有職位何來薪金？
沒有企業生意何來職位？
沒有企業生意之間的對人才的需求，何來高薪酬？
沒有利潤，企業生意為何選加拿大為基地？
世界上早已沒有地域限制，加拿大需要與全世界競爭，
如何令企業生意設立在加拿大？

你真的相信，高企業稅，高商業限制，敵視大企業，
會為加拿大引來更多的投資，增設更多職位嗎？
高企業稅真的能增加政府的收入？

逆地而處，你是公司老闆，你會選高成本、高租金、高稅率、高員工薪酬福利、工會勢力大、利潤極微的地方設立公司嗎？你唔想賺錢嗎？你有很多錢蝕嗎？你有很多時間浪費嗎？

今時今日大企業的背後，正是我們這批間接投資者，你買了的基金、RRSP、RESP、退休金所投資的組合、股票、利息 ……大企業他們賺錢是誰同時賺錢？他們無錢賺，最終與你的職位同時撤離，誰有損失？

如NDP說對讓小生意每年減少數千元的稅項真的能創造就業？這些小數都未能多騁請半個員工。

‘良性循環’或‘惡性循環’就是由你投的一票決定。

作者: Ovaltine 時間: 2011-4-29 22:09

i am gonna vote for layton, just to stir some **** up and start some chaos. a shuffle in power of the government may change the fate for us proletariats.

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-4-29 22:16

求變嘅人
最後都係嗰句
一蟹不如一蟹

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-29 23:03

回復 rainbow-davie

你是打工還是做老闆?

我正在一生意, 比工會壓到冇錢廉, 打算close咗佢, 會有200人 ...
satil 發表於 2011-4-29 13:33

I was a business owner. I was a staff. Now, I am a contractor.
I speak for my position. NO matter what, I don't want to have a corrupted government, and I know, 100% know that, Conservatives will get corrupted right away That's why they always want to have majority power.

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-29 23:07

我覺得, 順其自然啦. 既然係三分天下咪三分, 唔使出埋D恐嚇既廣告, 為多數而多數. 下流.
如果係做得真係好既, 自然會多人支持.

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-29 23:21

i am gonna vote for layton, just to stir some **** up and start some chaos. a shuffle in power of th ...
Ovaltine 發表於 2011-4-29 22:09

You should vote for the Green party, since you support the environmentalists.

作者: Ovaltine 時間: 2011-4-29 23:50

回復 20# peter236

No chance for them to be in power, so don't want to waste vote on them.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-30 00:01

回復 18# rainbow-davie

corrupted government?!?! how? proof?

LIberal not corrupted before? and now?

lmao

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-30 00:05

有人宣傳話保守黨唔好，有幾‘唔好’呢？
這是自由黨明知不能成為執政黨時的計策。
他們提出用小數政府來制衡吓。你們中計了。
過去數年NDP，Liberal及Bloc聯手互相支持對方的議案，(與真正的聯合政府有何分別!)
結果，三個小數反對黨聯手，挾持政府，通過荒謬、不理後果、自私的法案。
結果，三個小數反對黨聯手，為反對而反對，否決或拖延保守黨政府提出的良好法案。
這就是大家相信應有的好結果嗎？這會是比保守黨大多數全權掌政更好嗎？
現時國會的政策，法案及方向是（真的）為保守黨的原意嗎？
大部分的法案都是NDP, Liberal及Bloc互相為私心而出的，C-389就是最好的例子。
為何每次有可以另政府倒台的法案（如預算案），即有一反對黨用諸多理由支持通過，因為，這才可以繼續保持現在挾持狀態，繼續胡作非為。
經過數年，請大家睜開你的眼睛，看清是誰掌控今天的政府（如你所說）而做成今天的‘唔好’。過去數年政府基本是由NDP及Liberal加分離主義的Bloc幕後把持。請看看國會的會議記錄或投票結果。
http://howdtheyvote.ca
現在自由黨及新民主黨用‘保守黨’講大話為藉口推翻政府，因為他們認為是他們最有利的時機。其實，保守黨提出，監獄、戰機等問題只是在撥款法案‘討論’階段，若保守黨不提供足夠資料，又或反對黨不認同資料，反對黨只需投反對票阻止撥款便可，這才是反對黨的責任，亦是國會的議事的方式。當大眾國民都不同意再作大選時，反對黨強行以誤導選民的藉口推翻政府，是誰更有‘唔好’。
看清楚誰個玩弄你，誰在欺騙你，誰在借形勢取理益，誰是現時政府體制中的受害者。
試問，唔買戰機，甚至最好放棄所有軍備軍隊國防，唔建監獄，甚至最好釋放有監犯取消法律制度，我們的政府一定有最大節省。倍增企業稅率，倍增加有錢人的稅項，增加銷售稅，我們的政府一定有最大的收入。大家一定有美好的日子。

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-4-30 00:07

回復 rainbow-davie

corrupted government?!?! how? proof?

LIberal not corrupted before? and now?
...
satil 發表於 2011-4-30 00:01

Remember Mulroney government? They kept on spending money.

作者: satil 時間: 2011-4-30 00:14

回復 24# peter236

咁就要細心讀吓

http://www.loyaukee.com/forum/vi ... &extra=page%3D2

睇吓保守黨提出, 自由黨支持, 五年的數字, 證明錢是如何用, 是否真的不懂理財.

作者: rockypath 時間: 2011-4-30 01:32

Minority government = inefficient government = bad for the long term development of a country

作者: rainbow-davie 時間: 2011-4-30 01:44

以我經驗, 講真, 你點吹保守黨好, 我點話保守黨衰根本只係口水戰.
好無聊. 因為意識形態既野, 係一定唔會係俾其他人改變到. 係要由自己經歷去做決定.

你話Peter 可唔可以改變阿力變超級愛國愛黨既人? 唔可以.
阿力可唔可以改變Peter做民主鬥士?　都唔可以。

所以咪叫你慳Ｄ。　

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/)