Canada Election 2015

[geotag277]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

over the top of what?

BS Mountain of course

[flar]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

over the top of what?

He means over the cliff in the global race to the bottom on environmental regulations, labour standards and income inequality.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by flar

He means over the cliff in the global race to the bottom on environmental regulations, labour standards and income inequality.

I guess that it helps he is in one of the few jobs that would be difficult to outsource and move abroad.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by geotag277

A straw man is attacking an argument that was never made to be more easily defeated. I actually didn't do that this time.

Replace pedestrian with car drivers if it pleases you, the case is the same.

Isn't the death rate per km travelled for motorcycles something like 25 times that of other vehicles on the road?

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Migs

With the TPP signed this makes Canada the only G7 nation with free trade access to all of the US, Americas, Europe, and Asia-Pacific that’s more than 60% of world’s economy.

Well done Conservatives, this deal should catapult us over the top!

It still has to be ratified in all legislatures in the 12 countries, so it could still have issues, especially since much of the agreement hasn't been made publicly available yet.

We also haven't completely nailed down the Euro deal yet; ratification has not been completed.

Mexico has more deals though (and they have been the ones grabing the manufacturing jobs and propelling themselves upward), not a G7 country, but they are definitely ahead of us (and within our main trading block).

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Lio, I am thinking the current zeitgeist in favour of religious exceptions could indirectly represent a bonus for a libertarian like you!

More or less.

I'm in favor of freedoms and rights including employers' (to demand a hard hat, etc.), so this is kind of a loss of liberty, in a way. In a perfect world, a Sikh is free to keep his turban, and a construction industry employer is free to keep him out of his jobsite for that reason.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Isn't the death rate per km travelled for motorcycles something like 25 times that of other vehicles on the road?

I'm not sure about deaths offhand, but in Saskatchewan the severity of injuries for motorcyclists is 5x that of cars/trucks/SUVs/Vans/etc.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Isn't the death rate per km travelled for motorcycles something like 25 times that of other vehicles on the road?

Probably, but I'm not sure helmets would make a big difference.

I recall one ride in particular (when some of my high school buddies started to get their bikes), I was riding the "gf spot" going from Sherbrooke to Weedon on Rte 112... at these speeds any crash would've been instant death, helmet or not. (That was many years ago.)

Motorcycles already pay a lot more in registration fees precisely for that reason: it's way more dangerous (even with a helmet).

If the helmet doesn't help the survival rate much (which geotag's studies seem to show) then maybe we don't need it. I think many states don't have helmet requirements (I am sure that both TX and OK don't, I keep seeing people without helmets there... I also recall states on the way, like Indiana I think).

If the helmet was such a no-brainer, they'd have it mandatory -- like the seatbelt. (Which is mandatory everywhere except in relatively libertarian NH.)

[Bcasey25raptor]

How much do you think this tpp deal will impact the election?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by geotag277

First of all I've never really heard "money spent on enforcement" being a net negative. These "enforcement" tickets, from speeding tickets to helmet tickets, all generate revenue.

And you encapsulated a great line of thinking as it pertains to democracy. Tyranny of the majority. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. The weak evidence for helmet law safety doesn't really matter, the majority want riders to wear helmets because they don't ride, they aren't themselves burdened, and they generally have a bias against the riding demographic.

It would never happen for pedestrians because they wouldn't vote against their own interests.

It's interesting because helmet safety extends even to car drivers and car fatalities. If you can afford a car you should be able to afford a helmet for additional safety. But again, it would never happen. Like you said, too much burden.

The majority of Canadian adults have driver's licenses yet we still have huge numbers of laws pertaining to seatbelts, speed limits, etc. despite public support being strongly opposed to mandatory seatbelt laws when they were introduced so obviously safety laws are a little more complex than that aspect.

I think we'd first have to settle what is in someone's interests and who actually benefits or loses out from a regulation. Honestly I think this tyranny of the majority angle is just a ploy to distract people and tug at their emotions and isn't genuinely relevant to the issue.

The effectiveness of helmet laws, of course, does warrant further discussion.

As for the cost of enforcement, the issue isn't just about the cost to the government, but rather how much it's going to be for the citizens of the society overall. If you have lots of citizens paying out expensive penalties, that is a cost to society. And if you have lots of enforcement officers being paid for large numbers of worker hours to issue and document these tickets (requiring either new officers to be hired or existing ones to be diverted from other duties), that's another cost to society. And for the courts to spend time handling ticket disputes, or prosecuting people unwilling to pay is yet another cost.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

The Liberals released their plan

https://www.liberal.ca/files/2015/10/New-plan-for-a-strong-middle-class.pdf

At a glance this looks quite good. I like the part about increased transparency and creating a government advertising watchdog among other things. The part about letting their MP's vote freely is a bit toothless as it doesn't apply to any other parties and has several caveats for the circumstances in which they are allowed to do so within the Liberal party. Step in the right direction at least.

Re-instating the $40 million Harper cut for Federal Fisheries is a good sign along with re-organizing the NEB and re-instating the Navigable Waters Act. Much of their promises remain to be seen but they are at least going in the right direction.

[SignalHillHiker]

One of my favourite NL bands, Hey Rosetta, has also released an anti-Harper song.

Video Link

[GlassCity]

What I don't understand is that the niqab is presumably what's been causing he NDP's slide. But the Liberals have the same position on it, and they're soaring. It can't be just that, but nothing else has come out in the past few weeks.

[SignalHillHiker]

And King Danny has said Harper is running a racist campaign and he urged Newfoundlanders who are Conservative to recognize what Harper has done and, if they can't stomach voting Liberal or NDP, to express their displeasure by not voting at all.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/canada/newfound...lliams-stephen-harper-election-1.3256756

You can expect a significant percentage of the population to listen.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

What I don't understand is that the niqab is presumably what's been causing he NDP's slide. But the Liberals have the same position on it, and they're soaring. It can't be just that, but nothing else has come out in the past few weeks.

I think it's that the issue seems to be getting the most traction in Quebec and that is where the NDP have the highest support. The Liberals seem to be gaining momentum in other parts of the country for other reasons.

[Xelebes]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

What I don't understand is that the niqab is presumably what's been causing he NDP's slide. But the Liberals have the same position on it, and they're soaring. It can't be just that, but nothing else has come out in the past few weeks.

The NDP have been sliding due to losses in Quebec. The Liberals aren't gaining much in Quebec but elsewhere you have the Grits siphoning from the Dips base.

[Procrastinational]

If the Liberals came to power, I'd be pretty shocked if they backed out of the TPP. It will pass in parliament. It'll have the support of the two biggest parties.
I will say though that I am pretty pissed off with how the Conservatives have handled the negotiations for the TPP. Not with the content, but with the secrecy. Canadians do have the right to know what the government is negotiating on their behalf.

That being said, I'm glad we managed to come to an agreement on it. Say what you want, but being part of a trade pact that includes the #1 and #3 economies in the world is too good to pass up. In fact, historically, Japan has been quite protectionist, so the fact that they are opening up their economy somewhat presents a huge opportunity. I'm also surprised an agreement was passed with only minimal concessions towards the supply management system (I would have liked to have seen it dismantled entirely, but that would have been politically unfeasible for the Cons).

People caused an uproar when NAFTA came into force, and things have yet to become the doom and gloom they predicted. Sure a few manufacturing jobs went to the States and Mexico, but they were inefficient union jobs that were already starting to die off before NAFTA (loss of manufacturing jobs began in the 70's in most developed countries, long before any free trade deals). In exchange, many opportunities opened up in other industries that have far outweighed any loss in old school manufacturing jobs.

The thing that makes free trade agreements controversial is that it creates winners and losers within different industries. What most people don't realize is that the benefits on the whole always exceed the losses. That doesn't mean one country can't benefit more than another, but free trade between two countries will always benefit both at least to some degree.

I'm not a fan of these big comprehensive trade pacts. I'd like to see free trade agreements with one line of text. They should merely say "On (this day) all tariffs will be lifted". No back door clauses and exemptions for industries. Tariffs arbitrarily create winners and losers depending on which industries have the most lobbying power.

An example I've heard used is the US Steel Industry. There are very heavy tariffs on steel imported to the US to protect something like 700,000 steel industry workers. What that doesn't tell you is that there are around 15 million workers in the construction industry... An industry that would benefit tremendously from cheaper steel imports from abroad.




Also... Glad to see the NDP free fall is a sustained trend. The sooner they revert to third party status the better. I think it's important for all sides of the political spectrum to be represented. The loony left should have a voice. But they should not be the party in power.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

One of my favourite NL bands, Hey Rosetta, has also released an anti-Harper song.

Video Link

That was actually a really good song. The video was terrible but the song was great. Didn't realize Hey Rosetta were Newfs! It's stuff like this I really hope impacts the youth vote and gets people out for the ABC vote.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by flar

He means over the cliff in the global race to the bottom on environmental regulations, labour standards and income inequality.

[O-tacular]