Who to vote for in Canadian federal election in 2019?

I watch the current barrage of "Ain't I a great guy?" TV commercials being mounted by Mr. Scheer and I think "Could this guy come across as any less sincere?"



I'd like to hear/see what a government is actually going to do/is doing for my country. You can keep your partisan rhetoric, it's just a deflection.

I'll vote for anyone who firmly believes that the govt is supposed to work for us, not the other way around. So far, I'm not seeing that trait in any of the candidates.

Jinentonix said:

I'll vote for anyone who firmly believes that the govt is supposed to work for us, not the other way around. So far, I'm not seeing that trait in any of the candidates.

Click to expand...

Perhaps Mad Max , not sure if he is a candidate yet .

pgs said:

Perhaps Mad Max , not sure if he is a candidate yet .

Click to expand...

All that would do is split the Conservative vote, almost ensuring a Trudeau win.

Jinentonix said:

All that would do is split the Conservative vote, almost ensuring a Trudeau win.

Click to expand...

Possibly true , I was not endorsing him , simply stating that his official positions might have the government working for the people . Notice the. Might .

I'll vote for my best local candidate. If the party leaders were all running in my riding, I might lean towards Mad Max.

Walter said:

Conservative is the only sane choice for those who want a less intrusive gubmint.

Click to expand...

Why do you so favour protectionism? Why do you so oppose free markets?

You don't like Canadians working for a living wage?

Twin_Moose said:

You don't like Canadians working for a living wage?

Click to expand...

Raising nominal wages in the midst of inflation and high interest rates does not constitute raising real wages. Nominal wages are just numbers on fiat currency. If we truly want to raise real wages, then invest more in universal compulsory education and trades and professional education for the unemployed, the under-employed, and the underpaid so as to increase their productivity.

While protectionism may raise wages for the protected classes, it pushes prices up and so raises their wages to everyone else's harm. we don't build Canada by pitting businesses against consumers, we do so by educating the poor so as to raise productivity and by seeking efficiencies including international economies of scale.

The problem I see is that all the major parties are too focused on raising nominal wages while ignoring that that accomplishes nothing and that what we really need to do is to improve efficiencies so as to reduce the real cost of living.

So I get it reduce our wage because it is just a number on a piece of paper to be competitive with a foreign countries number on a piece of paper no real change OK gotcha

Twin_Moose said:

So I get it reduce our wage because it is just a number on a piece of paper to be competitive with a foreign countries number on a piece of paper no real change OK gotcha

Click to expand...

As the cost of living drops, you are absolutely correct. Government-legislated increases without any commensurate increase in efficiency just pushes prices up: the dog chasing its tail.

Never happen as the taxpayers are under increasing pressure to finance the wasteful Gov. and the have nots want more crowd.

Since you would qualify as one of the ones that have been guarding the hen house it seems to mean you are incredibly piss poor at that task or your outrage is as fake as it sounds and you are part of the problem.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbACCGf6q-c&t=68s

his 2009 entertaining documentary film explores the history of banking, the selling out of the prosperity of Canada, the clearance sale of Canadian businesses and the political liquidation of public infrastructures to the multi-national corporate oligarchy. How has this led to the biggest economic crash / recession / depression in Canadian history? Could it have something to do with our politicians listening to international bankers and corporations instead of the people Canada? How does the Canadian banking system really work? How does the central Bank of Canada compare with the American Federal Reserve? This movie presents these issues that affect every Canadian from the perspective of and delivered by concerned youth in a astute and colourful manner. This is a serious journalism piece that asks the tough questions directly to such politicians as Former Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin, Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, Ontario Gas Man Dan McTeague, NDP Leader Jack Layton, Mayor of Oshawa John Gray, Former Prime Minister of Canada John Turner and many more!

Did I not say wasteful Gov.? What part don't I understand? A bigger waste than some Bank theory you have is Welfare abuse, crack down on it put a limit how long one can be put on it without finding a job. It was originally set up to help a person that hit hard times to get back up and get back out into the workforce. Not the 10's of Billions of dollars industry it morphed into where people have figured out how to exploit it into a family financial plan passed on from generation to generation.

Twin_Moose said:

Did I not say wasteful Gov.? What part don't I understand? A bigger waste than some Bank theory you have is Welfare abuse, crack down on it put a limit how long one can be put on it without finding a job. It was originally set up to help a person that hit hard times to get back up and get back out into the workforce. Not the 10's of Billions of dollars industry it morphed into where people have figured out how to exploit it into a family financial plan passed on from generation to generation.

Click to expand...

Disability aside, we should replace social assistance with a Canadian Peace Corps. You sign up for the training period plus five years after that, it teaches you a trade or profession, and then puts you to work at slightly below the market rate for the work you're doing so as to give you an incentive to find the same or better work in the private sector.

It would be a win win: the government gets cheap labour and the applicant gets education and experience.

Nick Danger said:

I watch the current barrage of "Ain't I a great guy?" TV commercials being mounted by Mr. Scheer and I think "Could this guy come across as any less sincere?"

Click to expand...

Could it possibly be any worse than the infuriatingly pretentious, condescending tone that Trudeau subjects us to when he lectures to us that he's imposing a carbon tax for our own good, because we're all a bunch of lazy procrastinators who hate the environment so he has to kick us all in the balls with a new tax? Could anything be be more galling than that?

I listened to part of Trudeau's carbon tax speech this morning (the English part...that came after the french part...even though 4 in 5 people in this country don't speak french as their native language), and I had a hard time sitting through it without cringing at every other smug, pompous word. It's not what he says so much as how he says it...no, actually...it's both.

One thing's for sure...we will see in 12 months how tolerant, gullible or malleable Canadians are in general. If people buy this load of shit and give this clown another mandate, we as Canadians deserve exactly what's coming to us.

White_Unifier said:

Disability aside, we should replace social assistance with a Canadian Peace Corps. You sign up for the training period plus five years after that, it teaches you a trade or profession, and then puts you to work at slightly below the market rate for the work you're doing so as to give you an incentive to find the same or better work in the private sector.
It would be a win win: the government gets cheap labour and the applicant gets education and experience.

Click to expand...

Actually not a bad idea, who will finance this Peace Corps?

Twin_Moose said:

Actually not a bad idea, who will finance this Peace Corps?

Click to expand...

The same taxpayer who presently finances social assistance, but at least:

1. We'd be getting something in return for the investment, and

2. Would be giving people a hand up that they might actually appreciate rather than just contemptuously throwing money at them without actually helping them up.

In the short term, it would actually be more expensive than now since paying social assistance is less expensive than providing actual education. In the long run though, many of them would enter the work force and earn higher wages and probably not return to social assistance. Plus we'd get work out of them for different government projects meaning that we could then reduce the civil service.

The Canadian Peace Corps could also contract out to the provinces for any work that they need done.

Twin_Moose said:

Did I not say wasteful Gov.? What part don't I understand? A bigger waste than some Bank theory you have is Welfare abuse, crack down on it put a limit how long one can be put on it without finding a job. It was originally set up to help a person that hit hard times to get back up and get back out into the workforce. Not the 10's of Billions of dollars industry it morphed into where people have figured out how to exploit it into a family financial plan passed on from generation to generation.

Click to expand...

How do you expect to have 100% of the people working 100% of the time. Canada should be able to survive with 14% working and 85% on Social Services and not be classified as a useless eater when the rich throw away more food in a day than the ones on welfare eat.


How about go on the welfate a migrant would get and be dumped in downtown TO and a year later you write up a report. Do you think it would say they are living too high on the hog and cute need to be made or you bail after 30 days as it is so horrible?

So an 18% workforce is fair? How about an 85% taxpaying workforce and take some of the burden off the 40% that are paying all the bills now? Why are we importing workers when we have 60% sitting waiting for a Gov. check?