Carole James' first campaign announcement

[usog]

http://www.vancouversun.com/propose+billion+bond+help+environment/1279614/story.html
New Democratic Party leader Carole James was expected to make her first major campaign announcement Thursday, unveiling plans for a $10-billion bond program to raise money for spending on the environment.
AHAHAHAHAHAHA....HA...HA...ha....haaaaa...

Her first campaign announcement. Vague? Check. Totally pointless? Check. Massive waste of money? Check. It's the NDP, folks.

The link is good enough, I don't feel like spinning the article by quoting it and bolding certain parts. Read for yourselves. Honestly, we have enough problems as it is. I'd say we don't have the breathing space or luxury to pursue such niceties as "green" as these.

*disclaimer* Everything after the link is my personal opinion on the announcement and is in no way fact, although I think it is.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Wow, there's a game changer. She's got my vote :haha:

[Stingray2004]

Damn, I think the NDP might win just yet...

Carole James: “I think it fits the worries that people have right now.” :jester:

....with their own version of Dion's Green Shift

That one was so popular he almost became Prime Minister remained Opposition leader with a vastly reduced caucus.

[crazyjoeda]

Honestly, we have enough problems as it is. I'd say we don't have the breathing space or luxury to pursue such niceties as "green" as these.

I really dislike Carol James and I think the NDP is full of shit, but I think your comment is dumb because the most pressing problems the world has are environmental problems. The economy will always have ups and downs.

That said I think the Liberal's will be better for the environment and the economy than the NDP. Although I would like them to stop grizzly bear hunting and fish farming.

[usog]

Well, my main point was that green initiatives are indeed nice things to have, but we aren't exactly in a situation where we can make them priority one, no?

[WarrenC12]

In general I like green-based funds. Two main problems though:

1) Totally hypocritical after James' bashing all of the Liberal environmental policies.

2) The plan sounds like the government will pay me 5% (or whatever) on the bonds and lend this money to green programs.. but any plan where the government is in charge of handing out cash will be abused, be terribly inefficient, etc.

Actually only 40% will be issued as loans (maybe half will actually get paid back) and 60% spent on infrastructure. Guess what Carole, that's what the government is doing now(!!!). How do you think things are financed in a deficit? That's right: bonds!

Choice quote: "Simpson compared the plan to Victory Bonds, which were issued by government to help pay for the Second World War." Ever check the debt figures around that timeline?

Welcome to the New Spend-o-crats! :slob:

[s211]

And yet there will be no limit of people that still vote NDP. Only in BC...

[mr.x]

And the winning party is....the Campbell BC Liberals.



Carole James = Dodo bird. Too bad this isn't a joke, it spells of incompetence already.

[Stingray2004]

Hmmmmm ... James Bonds - 007 Series

THE NEW “JAMES” BOND - NDP REMAKE TANKS ON OPENING DAY

Finance Minister Colin Hansen says the new James Bond failed in the 1990s and bringing it back shows the NDP plans to replay policies that have already devastated British Columbia.

“This new James Bond should be called ‘Licence to Fail’ as it’s simply another tried and true way for the NDP to waste taxpayers’ money,” says Hansen. “We saw the NDP do this in the 1990s with BC Saving Bonds and it was a financial disaster. This new scheme might be repackaged with a fancy new bow but the risk to the province is simply too great a price to pay.”

http://www.victoria2020.com/?p=321

[Hong Kongese]

Well, my main point was that green initiatives are indeed nice things to have, but we aren't exactly in a situation where we can make them priority one, no?

I agree with you! Economy should come first. If there is no job, there will be no money, then nobody can afford to buy cars. When there is no car, there is no need to worry about the pollution and so on.... :)

[Smooth]

Here's the real cost of the NDP's 'green bonds'

By Craig McInnes, Vancouver Sun
February 13, 2009

It took more than 60 years, but on the last banking day of 2006, Britain paid the final instalment on a loan from Canada. Britain borrowed the money for a good cause -- to help pay for material needed to survive the Second World War -- but it still added to the country's crippling debt. In the aftermath, there were six years in which Britain had to defer payments because of a financial or political crisis.

War is expensive. While Canada wasn't as devastated as Britain, our government at the time still racked up a debt that was larger than the entire annual economic output of the country by the time the war was over.

Environmentalists have long called for international action on the scale of a world war to combat global warming. The point is to create through fear a self-interest in making sacrifices now to ward off greater harm in the future.

NDP leader Carole James has picked this context to frame her first major pre-election economic proposal, that the province start issuing "green bonds" to finance the fight against global warming.

The somewhat romantic idea is to provide British Columbians with a way to enlist in the fight against climate change while enjoying a decent return on their savings.

At the same time, the government, preferably an NDP government, would gain a billion additional dollars a year for 10 years to carry on the good fight.

With an eye to the next election, the Liberals have already dubbed the proposal the "James Bond," and while I haven't heard one yet, you can expect a Liberal ad based on the slogan "Don't give the NDP a licence to kill the B.C. economy."

Politicking aside, the green bond proposal reflects either a misunderstanding of government finances or a deliberate misrepresentation of the NDP's intentions.

First of all, the green bond proposal is not primarily about creating an investment opportunity. It is about increasing spending and adding $10 billion to the provincial debt. All for a good cause, of course, but as with the spending that allowed Britain to survive the Second World War, it uses money that eventually has to be repaid.

British Columbians who are buying the proposed green bonds are not really investing in the good works that are being financed. As long as they are getting market rates of return, they are investing in bonds, period.

The real investors are the taxpayers who will eventually have to repay the bondholders. They won't be given a choice of whether they want to pay an extra billion a year, except through their vote at election time.

So to evaluate the green bond proposal, we have to ask two separate questions:

First, are the expenditures worthwhile?

Second, are the bonds a good way to raise the necessary funds?

As for the first, without seeing details, it appears that they reflect the usual range of initiatives already proposed or undertaken by the municipal, provincial and federal governments, so are useful but not revolutionary.

As for the second, the Liberals scrapped a similar B.C. Savings Bond program shortly after taking office because it was an expensive way to raise money, with higher administration and interest costs than other forms of commercial financing.

What was true then is probably even more true now that the province with its triple "A" credit rating is able to tap into relatively cheap money.

Adding $10 billion to the total provincial debt -- now somewhere around $35 billion -- will likely erode that rating, making all borrowing more expensive.

If the cost of borrowing goes up, there will be less money for good works, not more.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Life/Here+real+cost+green+bonds/1285239/story.html

[BigWilly]

I think the last thing we need is a politician like James who wants to borrow even more money (selling bonds is essentially borrowing from BC tax payers), add to our debt (yes, the BC gov't has to repay people who buy bonds PLUS interest) and spend beyond our means.

Although i agree with James that green initiatives are important and i know where she is going by creating jobs by spending money on infrastructure but does she not understand that BC is in a heap of debt?? We'll be running a defecit the next few years and the best thing for BC is to obtain further private/public initiatives, encourage more privately funded projects by reducing corporate taxes or providing tax credits to further encourage private business to grow and grow greener.

I honestly think that we need a BC premier who can think more outside the box than to re-hash idea's that never worked in the past and re-package it into something that only appears new and different on the outside. We need a premier with some new and refreshing idea's on how to spur the economy, go greener and create jobs without substantially adding to the debt load UNLESS there is a business case to do so.

At this moment i would still have to vote Gordo especially when the other alternative is Carole James.

[vansky]

she aint' got no world class look or profile, where is the hope