Canada: No longer a Democracy

[Praxius]

so we revert back to the barter system and change the year number to zero? :lol:

I've previously explained my process here:

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/c...3-new-direct-democracy-government-revamp.html

Oh yes i agree with this assessment, people don't want gas guzzlers and the BIG 3 are far too slow to respond. Why has foreign car companies like toyota, honda, BMW, etc been so successful and the Big 3 such a failure?

Actually the only company I seen actually gain from what the got in profits from a year ago today was only Toyota.... I didn't hear too much about BMW, but last nights news said Honda dropped this past year.

And maybe the reason why those other companies did so well was because they're not actually North American companies, therefore they're not going to be affected by what's happening in North America as much as GM, Ford or Crys would be affected.

I agree that they should have been doing more to revamp their companies to vehicles that are easier on gas, and maybe this time they will. If they don't then they simply do not get any of this Bailout.... it's as simple as that, so there's still no real loss.

Maybe its because these companies are resistant to change and progress, are unadaptable, or just have poor buisness practises? Is there some adversion to allowing Foreign competitors to set up shop here?

Nope.... but as stated before, if they expect to get any of this bailout, there are requirements they must meet in order to get this bailout, because as you said, and as the Coalition has stated in their proposal, if they don't seem viable, they will not support them.... and yes, people will loose their jobs. But if the companies want this money and they make the changes required in order to get this money, then people keep their jobs and there really isn't an issue.

According to NAFTA, all signitories are not allowed to subsidize commodity based industries such as lumber, it is a violation of our free trade treaty. Canada's lumber industries are hit because of lax demand in the world market, its only appropriate that the industry shaves off jobs in order to ensure profitability.

Well I never liked NAFTA to begin with and is also a reason why we're in the situation we are currently in..... because we depend mostly on the US building their homes and now that they screwed up, we are now suffering, and NAFTA makes it pretty difficult to make the nessicary changes to keep the industry afloat. Canada, the US and Mexico did just fine before NAFTA, they can do it again.

Well it depends also on your qualifications. If the big 3 loses market share, their competitors would gain that market share and would need to ramp up production, which means hiring more workers

But not enough to balance out the amount of people who lost their jobs.... the market isn't big enough to take them all on and these companies that are doing ok right now won't do well if they simply take all of these workers on if the demand for those vehicles isn't there. Then you also have all of these workers being dependant on more forign companies..... when trouble hits those companies, guess who's first on the chopping block?

the plumbing thing is a joke, though there is a profitable buisness in pipe construction

It's still not a decent solution to the problem.

i can see what you're saying, but i don't like the idea of the liberals buddying up with separatists and the NDP. A Conservo-Liberal coalition would be perferable for me but i realize that both the liberals and conservatives are Incompetent.

Well they're all incompetent, that's for sure, but if they all get together and do their jobs, collectively perhaps they might actually pull off a government that actually works.

And who knows, if for some magical reason, the Bloc in this process might actually start feeling that they are a part of Canada and the decision making of Canada and decide not to seperate.... for now.

But we have 18 months at the very least of the Bloc co-operating with the coalition, which means 18 months of government actually doing it's job. After that, if the Coalition flops, then so be it.... back to another election.

i just hope they don't plunge our country into a recession

Well even the Conservatives have changed their story before all of this happened and admitted we will be running a deficit, and we are already technically in a recession..... so they can't really do any harm to those predictions except perhaps reduce the level of deficit or recession we will face.

Since Harper has not stated any real plans or objectives to deal with this issue, he does not have my confidence and should be replaced with those who can.

How is canada a democracy if regular citizens don't have a say? We should stop spreading our own lies.

We are a Democracy and Citizens did have their say... that is exactly how we came to this point in our Democracy. If nobody wanted this to occur and if everybody really hated the NDP and the Liberals and the Bloc.... then everybody would have voted for the Conservatives enough to give them a majority..... they didn't, therefore this is how it plays out.

nothing is ever easy, liberals need to relearn how to work for votes

And the voting process needs to be re-worked so that it better represents the will of the people. Allowing one party to rule the government when over 50% of the population who voted didn't vote for them, is a big issue, at least for me..... that is why the Coalition sounds like the most logical choice.

 

[Praxius]

someones stringy today.

I always am.

i took the previous comment as "conservatives suffer under the coalition" and i responded that both you and i will be governed by this coalition and any stuff they mess up on we will all suffer the consequences.

Fair enough, it sounded completely different when I first read it.

I completely and 100% accept the consequences of what may occur if this Coalition becomes reality and if we go down the crapper because of it, so be it..... I'll owe you a can of pepsi.

And if this Coalition fails and fails miserably, I'll be one of the first to point it out and raise all hell over it..... don't worry, I'll be plenty mad..... but I am willing to give them a chance, like I gave the Conservatives.... they mucked it all up, so my chances goto the Coalition at present.

honestly do you treat all newcomers with such hostility? Especially ones that strike up a debate with you?

I treat every single member in here the exact same way as I have treated you. It is nothing personal towards you in anyway. I can take someone saying my opinion or what I say is stupid, or retarded, I can take someone insulting me and calling me a moron..... I can handle and put up with a lot of things.....

..... but the moment I feel someone is directly threatening me, it's on like Donkey Kong. Since you clarified your statement in regards to me (Personally) "suffering", there is no issue.

To me, it sounded as though you were implying that I will suffer by you (at your hands) so of course I reacted as I would normally react to a comment like that.... as I would expect anyone else to react if I decided to threaten them in some way.

As you can see, I don't normally carry over any emotion from post to post and if others are willing to debate and stick to the topic, so shall I.

The issue was clarified, we move on..... no biggie.

 

[Zzarchov]

Yeah i do, But it involves Laissaz-Faire economics

Laissaz-Faire only works in a free market. Canada is not, we are full of state monopolies and regulations (some good some bad).

I believe that the canadian economy is not at the same degree of stagnation as the US, therefore the idea of a "stimulus package" is premature, and quite frankly the very idea of an auto bailout disturbs me, we're basically subsidizing an industry with a shrinking market,and a failing buisness practise under the pretense of saving jobs. If these workers were skilled, they could easily utilize their experience from working for these auto-makers and use these skills to work another job. Or be a plumber, i hear they make quite a bit of money.

Plumbers cannot be made from Autoworkers with a wave of a hand, that would still require stimulus in the way of invested in education.

then this is where we differ, i agree with his policy of non-intervention, as it is far too premature to be thinking of a stimulus package. However, I wouldn'tbe surprised if he did an about face just to cling to power

Such is his Duty, he was not given a mandate to run the country without the support of other parties. If he refuses to compromise he is out, such was his mandate.

I can't blame the NDP for doing it though, this is the first taste of federal power they've had ever.

And they have a duty to represent their constituents. We are a riding system, its not your job to worry about the country as a whole unless that also impacts your constituents. Perhaps it is a terrible system, but the conservatives never had any issues with it previously.

I didn't say i spoke for you, i'm pointing out the fact that he was elected with a minority government, and thats what canadians expected to recieve. I didn't say "CANADA WANTS A CONSERVATIVE MINORITY", because i don't think most canadians even have that much faith in their government.

No, Canadians voted for their local representative. It was in no campaign platform of the Tories that they wanted a minority government, in fact they clearly stated they expected a majority.

Canadians voted for their local MPs, the local MP's then decide the government. That has ALWAYS been the system.

Maybe liberals should garner some more donations from their supporters/buisness leaders? Obama had no problem raising millions, you don't have to be conservative to bring in alot of donations, you just have to be a party that matters.

Maybe Harper should respect the wishes of the voters. He was not given a mandate to make any such changes. He is expected to form a coalition to govern the country or he can stand aside while someone who can control parliment runs things.

If he wanted to run things himself, he should have altered his policy so that a majority of Canadians would support him through their elected MP's.

Even if harper removed that policy, do you think they'd stop the coalition just because of that?

Its their job to represents the interests of their constituents, if Harper refuses to compromise to adhere to our democratic principles, then he can stay out of Government.

He did not win a majority and he needs badly to remember that.

The election clearly stated whoever ruled needed a coalition, Harper refused to join a coalition so he can sit out.

That is our system and he knew that last election and has made no effort at reform.

 

[Mongul]

I've previously explained my process here:

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/c...3-new-direct-democracy-government-revamp.html

so you're a libertarian socialist? I got nothing against you personally but i find such theories make assumptions on human personality and traits that just aren't true, and that much of them are dreamers.

Actually the only company I seen actually gain from what the got in profits from a year ago today was only Toyota.... I didn't hear too much about BMW, but last nights news said Honda dropped this past year.

And maybe the reason why those other companies did so well was because they're not actually North American companies, therefore they're not going to be affected by what's happening in North America as much as GM, Ford or Crys would be affected.

lol i hope you know that ever since the 90s the japanese economy is virtually stagnant? It grows less than 1% a year. Certainly you can't claim economic prosperity outside of NA as a factor in the falling of the Big 3.

I agree that they should have been doing more to revamp their companies to vehicles that are easier on gas, and maybe this time they will. If they don't then they simply do not get any of this Bailout.... it's as simple as that, so there's still no real loss.

But can they pull it off and be economically viable? thats the question. Theres innumerable numbers of factors that are in play here. CAW is so powerful that i think they are financially strangling the big 3, demanding unreasonable benefits in the face of the tought economic slowdowns. Foreign competitors, notably, don't have unions.

Nope.... but as stated before, if they expect to get any of this bailout, there are requirements they must meet in order to get this bailout, because as you said, and as the Coalition has stated in their proposal, if they don't seem viable, they will not support them.... and yes, people will loose their jobs. But if the companies want this money and they make the changes required in order to get this money, then people keep their jobs and there really isn't an issue.

what if we give them this bailout and they still flop.. We're out a few bills and people still lose their jobs. The problem might be that the total demand for cars have dropped, and the markets have shrunk. Therefore how would it be profitable to maintain the same level of production when demand has fallen?

Well I never liked NAFTA to begin with and is also a reason why we're in the situation we are currently in..... because we depend mostly on the US building their homes and now that they screwed up, we are now suffering, and NAFTA makes it pretty difficult to make the nessicary changes to keep the industry afloat. Canada, the US and Mexico did just fine before NAFTA, they can do it again.

Actually, even without nafta we would still be in the same situation, the Auto-Pact that created thousands of jobs was basically the predecessors of Nafta itself. In effect acccording to nafta, the only way to subsidize your industry is if the US and Mexico agree to it, which i highly doubt they would for the forestry sector. We are inherently connected to the US, since they make up 80% of our exports, if they go down, we aren't far behind. Nafta in my opinon falls flat on it's face when considering the fact that it still allows subsidies in the agriculture sector. People were predicting a reccession for at least a year, it was pretty obvious to economists with all the debt being raked up.

But not enough to balance out the amount of people who lost their jobs.... the market isn't big enough to take them all on and these companies that are doing ok right now won't do well if they simply take all of these workers on if the demand for those vehicles isn't there. Then you also have all of these workers being dependant on more forign companies..... when trouble hits those companies, guess who's first on the chopping block?

the reason why theres not enough market is because demand has fallen, which means that overall production must be cut. Hence the inevitability of job loss. Truely determined/hard working/intelligent workers would take a loan out and go back to school to learn a trade, and then pay it off. Instead of bailing out the auto industry we should use that money and set up an interest-free Loan program.

It's still not a decent solution to the problem.

joke

Well they're all incompetent, that's for sure, but if they all get together and do their jobs, collectively perhaps they might actually pull off a government that actually works.

And who knows, if for some magical reason, the Bloc in this process might actually start feeling that they are a part of Canada and the decision making of Canada and decide not to seperate.... for now.

The bloc are like our appendices, there was a use for them once, but now its just there. I hope you're right though, i just want whats best for my country, even if it means i have to run.

Well even the Conservatives have changed their story before all of this happened and admitted we will be running a deficit, and we are already technically in a recession..... so they can't really do any harm to those predictions except perhaps reduce the level of deficit or recession we will face.

Since Harper has not stated any real plans or objectives to deal with this issue, he does not have my confidence and should be replaced with those who can.

fair enough, But i doubt the NDP or Liberals have enough economic savvy to deal with the current situation, i would have much preferred the previous PM Paul Martin, at least he knows how to balance the budgets.

We are a Democracy and Citizens did have their say... that is exactly how we came to this point in our Democracy. If nobody wanted this to occur and if everybody really hated the NDP and the Liberals and the Bloc.... then everybody would have voted for the Conservatives enough to give them a majority..... they didn't, therefore this is how it plays out.

this is more a republic rather than a democracy. We vote in representatives to voice our opion, we don't elect our PM or our head of state.

And the voting process needs to be re-worked so that it better represents the will of the people. Allowing one party to rule the government when over 50% of the population who voted didn't vote for them, is a big issue, at least for me..... that is why the Coalition sounds like the most logical choice.

i agree, however i disagree with the idea of the coalition, we need a leader with a plan for the future, not a series of compromises made between 3 parties just to shut the tories out of power. The Coalition doesn't even have a plan to deal with the current economic crisis, i think they need to present their plan to the GG and the public at the very least before she gives them the authority to run our nation

 

[Mongul]

Laissaz-Faire only works in a free market. Canada is not, we are full of state monopolies and regulations (some good some bad).

well, looks like i gotta get to work

Plumbers cannot be made from Autoworkers with a wave of a hand, that would still require stimulus in the way of invested in education.

Interest free loans instead of the bailout

Such is his Duty, he was not given a mandate to run the country without the support of other parties. If he refuses to compromise he is out, such was his mandate.

I'm not supporting harper, i just don't think This coalition would be any better than Harper's minority.

And they have a duty to represent their constituents. We are a riding system, its not your job to worry about the country as a whole unless that also impacts your constituents. Perhaps it is a terrible system, but the conservatives never had any issues with it previously.

Thats the problem with our federal system, its too localized. We already have municipalities and provincial governance, the federal system should apply to the country as a whole, not just specific locations

No, Canadians voted for their local representative. It was in no campaign platform of the Tories that they wanted a minority government, in fact they clearly stated they expected a majority.

Canadians voted for their local MPs, the local MP's then decide the government. That has ALWAYS been the system.

then the question becomes "are you satisfied witht he current system?"

Maybe Harper should respect the wishes of the voters. He was not given a mandate to make any such changes. He is expected to form a coalition to govern the country or he can stand aside while someone who can control parliment runs things.

If he wanted to run things himself, he should have altered his policy so that a majority of Canadians would support him through their elected MP's.

How does this address the inability of the Liberals to garner Donations from their constituencies?

Its their job to represents the interests of their constituents, if Harper refuses to compromise to adhere to our democratic principles, then he can stay out of Government.

He did not win a majority and he needs badly to remember that.

The election clearly stated whoever ruled needed a coalition, Harper refused to join a coalition so he can sit out.

That is our system and he knew that last election and has made no effort at reform.

fair enough

 

[Zzarchov]

I should point out, Interest Free Loans are still investment.

Money has time value, especially with the government. When the government gets more money it issues debt with interest (especially when its already running a deficit)

Giving interest free loans (which they don't to existing students) is still subsidy and still costs big money.

And whether or not the system should be changed isn't this matter. I agree it should, however the best way to fix a stupid law, is to enforce it.

If Canadians don't like whats going on, maybe we could do something drastic like say, I don't know,

Actually put into law how our prime minister is chosen and what his powers and responsibilities are?

I know I wouldn't mind our leader have an actual defined position. The Janitor at McDonalds has a job description for pete's sake.

 

[Mongul]

no doubt, but an investment like this would be more likely to succeed since it banks on the determination of workers and not on the likelihood of success of a failing company

 

[Stretch]

true defenition of an oxymoron........ democracy and politics

 

[Inteligento]

Nobody wantas the bloc to have that much of a say, neither Dion nor Layton is fit to lead the country and nobody wants another election for at least two yrs.

Who is nobody ??????????

 

[Zzarchov]

we need a leader with a plan for the future, not a series of compromises

This gets me. The whole point of a riding based electoral system is to force voters to make compromises (Through vote splitting) rather than pick the leader they want.

That mentality is supposed to transfer up the system. Our system of governance is built upon being forced to make compromises to represent the will of everyone.

If you want a strong leader, lets have a system where people vote for a leader, in which case that leader would still not be Harper as he didn't even have 40% of the vote let alone 50+%

 

[Adriatik]

Canada will still be a democracy when Harper will be gone... A better one.

 

[Stretch]

define democracy

 

[Inteligento]

I just don't like the twisted logic the liberal party uses to put laws into effect that don't improve the quality of life of Canadians and only serve to snowball the juggernaut of bureaucracy spoil the feeling of freedom.
The reason we even have a Conservative Government is because the last Liberal Government proved to be a criminal organization intent on pilfering the public purse so their friends could party on the illusion of job creation.
The only jobs they created were in the ineffective gun registry.
If they had legislated a minimum ratio for law officers per capita (say 1/50,000) they might have been able to enforce some of the laws already on the books instead of creating new ones that serve only to piss people off and create a false sense of security. Along with this would be to double at least for the short term the number of courts to deal with backlogs that have put potential convicts back into the population further adding to the frustration of victims of crime and law biding citizens.
And nun of the parties have the guts to decriminalize marijuana for say a five year trial period just to see if will cause the mayhem they say it will.

 

[Lineman]

This coup d'etat is all the more reason for the west to kiss everything east of Thunder Bay good bye and form its own republic. Just watch for the long wagon trains that'll form as industry and the population head west and out of Ontario and Quebec. (You Newfs better rejoin the UK as soon as you can, you don't wanna be on board the central canadian muck trawler with its three captains; Dion, Doucette, and Layton as it slips below the horizon)

 

[scratch]

Lineman,

With all due respect to you.

You are blowing this way out of proportion and fear mongering.

regs
scratch

 

[Vanni Fucci]

This coup d'etat is all the more reason for the west to kiss everything east of Thunder Bay good bye and form its own republic. Just watch for the long wagon trains that'll form as industry and the population head west and out of Ontario and Quebec. (You Newfs better rejoin the UK as soon as you can, you don't wanna be on board the central canadian muck trawler with its three captains; Dion, Doucette, and Layton as it slips below the horizon)

A coup d'etat is an illegal siezure of power.

Whatever your feelings about what's happening in our country, it is not a coup d'etat.

If Harper wasn't such a petulant child, he'd have majority support in Parliament, if not a majority of the seats...

His government would be guess what? That's right, a coalition, and most likely he would get his support from BQ...

The Bloc is lagging behind Conservative Party action

If you feel this strongly about it, you could always move somewhere that still supports conservative ideologies...

I hear Iran is nice this time of year...

 

[scratch]

Well VF,

That is certainly a different take....

regards
scratch

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Well VF,

That is certainly a different take....

regards
scratch

How so?

In the case of BQ propping up the Cons it would likely not be a formal affair, with the coalition signing their names in blood, but an agreement in prinicple to align in their voting on confidence issues...which is what has been happening anyway...

Harper's conservatives crossed the line with the FU though...no more support from the BQ for them...:smile:

 

[scratch]

Actually I was making a reference to Iran.

Anyways, IMO, your idea can hold water.

regards
scratch

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The reason we even have a Conservative Government is because the last Liberal Government proved to be a criminal organization intent on pilfering the public purse so their friends could party on the illusion of job creation.

Sorry Inteligento, the reason we have a conservative government is that Liberals have been in power for too long (13 years). Normally when one party has been in power for a long time, people give the other fellow a chance. Sponsorship scandal was just a reason, an excuse. If it had not been that, it would have been something else.

If you look world over, one sees the same pattern in most democracies. After Republicans governed for a long time, people have given Democrats a chance. In Australia, PM Howard got three majorities, now the opposition Labour Party is in power federally and in each and every state, a clean sweep of power.

In Britain, after Tories got four majorities, Labour got three. Now after three Labour majorities, Tories seem poised to get a majority again. That is how thing go normally.

Canada has been somewhat of an exception, mainly because Conservatives have a weak, petulant, dictatorial leader. By all rights, Harper should have secured a majority election before last, but he didn’t succeed. Even this election he didn’t get the majority, this really points to the inherent weakness of the Conservative party in Canada.

But I don’t think sponsorship scandal had much to do with it, it served as an excuse, nothing more.