So many sirens ce soir? What's going on in Toronto tonight? I’m Voting Liberal. Here’s why.
Because I want a government:
- That cuts income taxes rather than corporate taxes
- That believes in and has the balls to tax environmental externalities (the fancy way of saying “the green shift” aka – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_tax ) such that the true costs of goods and services are pushed not only on the manufacturer but also on the consumer
- That has a proven track record dealing with times of significant economic uncertainty
- That supports the arts; and
- That supports childcare – not just a measly $2000 tax credit (people are paying that in a month to have their children cared for).
Now, any of the three left leaning parties (Liberal, NDP, Green) will give you these items. However, if people vote for all three and spread the “left” vote – the conservatives will win. Remember – it’s first past the post, not proportional voting. For example, 30% voting liberal, 20% voting NDP, and 15% voting Green, the Conservatives would win with the remaining 35%. That means that even though 65% of the votes go to left leaning candidates yet a right leaning candidate wins?! To me, that’s not democracy – that’s an overcrowded left.
If you’re left, vote with the majority – VOTE LIBERAL.
Consider this, and discuss it with friends and family you know are voting NDP or Green.
The majority party for the left depends upon your riding, actually.
I am in a Conservative stronghold in Alberta, so I intend to vote for the exact party I want, since that helps get them federal funding.
Have you checked out this site yet?
Yes, I’ve seen the site and I appreciate the idea, I’ve just found that the large majority of their “recommendations” are to vote for the liberals.
_One day_ we’ll have proportional voting and we won’t have to think twice about having a conservative government serving a thrice split population of lefties.
So many NDP voters always get pulled away at the last minute every election because of this strategic voting shit. Vote for what you believe, not for what will win. Two party systems are for Americans.
It’ll probably be a minority anyway, so voting NDP could give the balance of power to them instead of the liberals or conservatives.
Plus Dion’s a douche.
3 Truths: death, taxes and uncertainty, so no proven record is going to save anyones asses.
I do not like any of them, except for Gilles Duceppe. I’m trying, but they all seem lower than average in my opinion. Gilles Duceppe seems to be the true intellectual out of the bunch. Obviously it is counter productive to vote a seperatist.
However…I’m a “maverick”…lol
liberal=progression=reform
Democratic=social equality=optimism
the choice is simple……optimism or reform. however choosing one will result in absolutely no change what so ever to the Canadian economy. Vote Hot Dog….Atleast you’ll get something out of it ummm hot dog…see Im a winner already.
So, only 58% of Candians turned out to vote, the Cons picked up some more seats but retain a minority.
Sigh, we can only hope the Liberals can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make a come-back.
Politics and Religion are the two things you’re not supposed to talk about BEB, I totally disagree with you on this assessment. We’ll fight it out on Friday :P
Strategic voting is not the way. Vote for what you believe.
“If you’re left, vote with the majority” how about u grow a pair and come back …lol
I love the lefty mindset… it’s more important to be true to yourself than to be effectual! It’s not whether you win or lose! It’s how you failed to play the game!
If you don’t feel like checking off any of the boxes then make a new one and vote jedi :)
PS. I don’t care who you vote for I’m just glad you exercised your right to vote.
Props to Marcel – I agree.
I always vote for the party I believe in. HOWEVER check out the link below:
http://www.voteforenvironment.ca/
It’s an interactive website that tells you if you need to vote strategically or not based on your individual riding (i.e. if your riding is a swing vote)
Take a look to see if you’re in a key swing riding or if you can vote as your heart desires
That’s right – vote for what you believe in so that with which you are ideologically opposed to can win.
When we have a proportional voting system in Canada, you can vote for whoever you like. Personally, I’d rather choose the worst of two different types of liberals than give a riding away to a conservative.
-”That cuts income taxes rather than corporate taxes”
No thanks. I want corporate tax cuts so that business will thrive within Canada and more jobs will be created. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
-”That believes in and has the balls to tax environmental externalities”
Why not reward companies that are enviro-friendly with tax breaks instead of punishing one’s that aren’t?
-”That has a proven track record dealing with times of significant economic uncertainty.”
Umm… the economy pretty much runs in cycles, regardless who is in power. But tell me how a philosophy of smaller government and less spending isn’t fundamentally sound?
-”That supports the arts”
The arts should support itself. If enough Canadians are interested then they will pay to enter museums, see performances, etc. If there is little support, why should it be funded?
“That supports childcare”
I don’t have children, why should I have to pay? Also $2000 a year is more than enough to hire a baby-sitter.
While I respect your political views we clearly don’t see eye to eye on a lot of issues. I still respect your passion, keep up the good work on your blog.
No thanks. I want corporate tax cuts so that business will thrive within Canada and more jobs will be created. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Listen, if personal taxes went down the most obvious factor would be that the cost of labour would go down. I think, as an individual, you would except less overall pay if you were making the same amount of money – after taxes.
Why not reward companies that are enviro-friendly with tax breaks instead of punishing one’s that aren’t?
This is a moot point because there are already incentives to be more eco-friendly – what I’m referring to here is a pigovian tax.
Umm… the economy pretty much runs in cycles, regardless who is in power. But tell me how a philosophy of smaller government and less spending isn’t fundamentally sound?
The Conservative Party of Canada is the new kid on the block. Voting for change, simply for the purpose of change is not necessarily what should be done. In any case, Liberals are more centric in their policies than Conservatives give them credit for (I’m talking fiscally, not socially here)
The arts should support itself. If enough Canadians are interested then they will pay to enter museums, see performances, etc. If there is little support, why should it be funded?
This is a point of contention. By virtue of it’s nature art is expensive. A fundamental part of the idea behind being “liberal”, at least from an economic standpoint, is that the over-arching goal is to raise the utility of the individual who is worst off in society. Suggesting that we should not subsidize art is like suggesting that it could only be appreciated by those that afford it. That is not my vision of Canada at all.
I don’t have children, why should I have to pay? Also $2000 a year is more than enough to hire a baby-sitter.
Granted you don’t have children, but much of an economy’s growth is associated with population growth. Sorry to put it this way, but kids bring in the dollars – for everything. Population growth is a GOOD THING for any economy and suggesting unrealistic policies for growth is a somewhat shortsighted alternative to infrastructure advancements.
This arguement is very similar in nature to saying. I don’t have cancer so why should I pay taxes to support cancer patients – the answer is the same, eventually, you’ll suffer and you’ll be glad that the infrastructure is there to support you.
Ditto mon ami :)
No thanks. I want corporate tax cuts so that business will thrive within Canada and more jobs will be created. Don’t bite the hand that feeds you.
Listen, if personal taxes went down the most obvious factor would be that the cost of labour would go down. I think, as an individual, you would except less overall pay if you were making the same amount of money – after taxes.
Why not reward companies that are enviro-friendly with tax breaks instead of punishing one’s that aren’t?
This is a moot point because there are already incentives to be more eco-friendly – what I’m referring to here is a pigovian tax.
Umm… the economy pretty much runs in cycles, regardless who is in power. But tell me how a philosophy of smaller government and less spending isn’t fundamentally sound?
The Conservative Party of Canada is the new kid on the block. Voting for change, simply for the purpose of change is not necessarily what should be done. In any case, Liberals are more centric in their policies than Conservatives give them credit for (I’m talking fiscally, not socially here)
The arts should support itself. If enough Canadians are interested then they will pay to enter museums, see performances, etc. If there is little support, why should it be funded?
This is a point of contention. By virtue of it’s nature art is expensive. A fundamental part of the idea behind being “liberal”, at least from an economic standpoint, is that the over-arching goal is to raise the utility of the individual who is worst off in society. Suggesting that we should not subsidize art is like suggesting that it could only be appreciated by those that afford it. That is not my vision of Canada at all.
I don’t have children, why should I have to pay? Also $2000 a year is more than enough to hire a baby-sitter.
Granted you don’t have children, but much of an economy’s growth is associated with population growth. Sorry to put it this way, but kids bring in the dollars – for everything. Population growth is a GOOD THING for any economy and suggesting unrealistic policies for growth is a somewhat shortsighted alternative to infrastructure advancements.
This argument is very similar in nature to saying. I don’t have cancer so why should I pay taxes to support cancer patients – the answer is the same, eventually, you’ll suffer and you’ll be glad that the infrastructure is there to support you.
Ditto mon ami :)
“The Conservative Party of Canada is the new kid on the block. Voting for change, simply for the purpose of change is not necessarily what should be done. In any case, Liberals are more centric in their policies than Conservatives give them credit for (I’m talking fiscally, not socially here)”
To be fair, Harper has been much more moderate then the Liberals have given him credit for. Yet every election they try to paint him as a right wing extremist. (The devil you don’t know campaigns)
——————-
“This argument is very similar in nature to saying. I don’t have cancer so why should I pay taxes to support cancer patients – the answer is the same, eventually, you’ll suffer and you’ll be glad that the infrastructure is there to support you.”
Cancer is something you can’t choose (aside from lifestyle habits). Besides, I can guarantee that every Canadian uses the Health Care system at least once before they die (usually much more than once), especially as they get older. However, NOT everyone has kids. This is something that we DO have a large degree of control over. Responsible adults PLAN for children and as such, usually have the money to take care of them.
For those who can’t afford? Sure, I guess I would be willing to look into some kind of daycare system for people below a set income level. But why should it have to be a huge massive NATIONAL coverage type policy? My parents raise me without any government help and gave me a GREAT childhood (my family was only middle class). I don’t see why it has to be such a big program like many people want it to be.
Childcare is not “babysitting” and definitely costs a hell of a lot more than “$2000 a year” per child. A babysitter would cost even more. Setting aside the cost to the family, there is the on-going issue of having enough centres and workers for all these kids. That is generally what the foremost concern is about regarding a national strategy.
As to the comment on “planning” children, that is very, very amusing. About 25% of pregnancies in Canada are unplanned and while using contraception. Which works out to about 100,000 babies a year that someone tried to prevent, but it happened anyway. Acknowledging that some of this number is because of not using a method correctly, you still end up with a large number of kids.
“As to the comment on “planning” children, that is very, very amusing. About 25% of pregnancies in Canada are unplanned”
Which leaves 75% of children PLANNED. A vast majority. So basically 3 out of 4 people plan for their kids. Why should those smart three people have to pay for the one stupid person?
Firstly, suggesting that someone is “stupid” for unplanned pregnancy is outrageous. Procreation is a function of human civilization and is the only way that our race continues.
Secondly, it is not my argument that the state should pay for the entirety of childcare, but I do think that we should support and subsidize it such that infrastructure is there to support not only the healthy development of children but also allow adults to continue being productive members of the economy.
“Firstly, suggesting that someone is “stupid” for unplanned pregnancy is outrageous. Procreation is a function of human civilization and is the only way that our race continues.”
The planet is becoming overpopulated as it is. Over a billion people in China and India… I’m sure many of them will be willing to come here to fill the void. “…”
Also, there is a second option. If you have an unexpectancy that you can’t afford there are lots of people who can’t have kids who would LOVE to have a newborn baby… or there is abortion. So really, there are no excuses.
EDIT: Comment edited for inappropriate reference.
Forgot to add>>
You know what the real problem is with this country? We are becoming a bunch of bleeding hearts. Smart people can get by just fine and don’t need a handout from “Papa Jack” or “Mrs. Ignatieff”. What happened to all the MEN? Thank god the Conservatives are still around, representing people who still have their balls firmly attached and are able to take care of their own.
Marty,
I’ve edited your 2nd last comment to remove an element of inappropriate content regarding your personal life.
—-
Liberal bashing aside, it’s possible that eventually you will have children one day… planned or… dare I say it – unplanned. Once you see the cost of daycare, we’ll see if you can afford it.
But again, that’s IFF the infrastructure is there. Perhaps there won’t even be a space available for your child in the future.
“I’ve edited your 2nd last comment to remove an element of inappropriate content regarding your personal life.”
I would expect censorship… from a liberal.
There’s nothing liberal about it – I won’t except crude or inappropriate comments on my website, ad hominem arguments included. Don’t like it? Learn to express yourself without being crude or don’t comment on my website.
Thank you, come again.
Wow.
Reading comprehension is apparently lacking as well.
I also find the comment about abortion amusing, considering that the Cons have already tried sneaking the beginnings of anti-abortion legislation (Bill C-484, “Unborn Victims of Crime Act”) in through the back door. Thankfully, they’ve so far been unsuccessful.
I didn’t say I agreed with the Conservatives on every issue. In fact, I am a libertarian and have been for years. I demand freedom on BOTH sides of the spectrum, economic AND social.