|
THC posted:Clark doesn't speak French and is probably too dumb to learn it. That might matter to the four or five remaining red tories, but the average bitter ender Conservative party member is a total loving poltroon, who would gladly flip off Quebec and vote for Canada's Sarah Palin if they thought she was the right combination of "electable" (read: sheltering them from being accused of sexism), and right wing.
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
So she would be Canada's Scott Walker? Thrusted into federal politics with a doomed strategy simply because her own province wanted to get rid of her that badly?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Morroque posted:So she would be Canada's Scott Walker? Thrusted into federal politics with a doomed strategy simply because her own province wanted to get rid of her that badly? Wisconsin despises Scott Walker but that's not why he tried for his presidential bid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? I'm trying to learn more about things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
THC posted:Clark doesn't speak French and is probably too dumb to learn it. Which means she's more than qualified to follow in the footsteps of Preston Manning and Stockwell Day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
Vic Boss posted:Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? CI is reading this and quivering with rage as he mashes where the "reply" button should be, if he wasn't probated right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Vic Boss posted:Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? The Kwan is beyond your feeble concepts of 'like' or 'dislike'. She merely is Jenny Kwan. And that's OK.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Clark running for the CPC leadership sounds like BCNDP wishful thinking. Though she managed to win the leadership of the Libs here despite having no backers and then won a landslide while being the quintessential empty suit, so weirder things have happened. If she goes though, one of the competent Liberals that actually wants to do stuff as premiere will become BCLib leader. Not sure if that is the way we want to go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
Whiskey Sours posted:On the other hand she's probably unelectable federally. Uhh... that was once believed to be the situation in B.C. as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
It's interesting watching conservative parties around the world basically copy the GOP and now are all suffering the same brain drain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 13:38
|
|
|
Vic Boss posted:Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? I think she's pretty 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Vic Boss posted:Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? Most goons don't care about her one way or the other, but CI hates her with a burning passion usually saved for real estate investors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Vic Boss posted:Do goons generally like or dislike Jenny Kwan? Why? It's because they hate all good and wholesome things, like taking your family to Disneyland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Disneyland is White Trash heaven and though I've never been, I can only assume they brainwash you when you get there because everyone I know who has gone needs to go back every loving year, even if they're drowning in debt
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:That might matter to the four or five remaining red tories, but the average bitter ender Conservative party member is a total loving poltroon, who would gladly flip off Quebec and vote for Canada's Sarah Palin if they thought she was the right combination of "electable" (read: sheltering them from being accused of sexism), and right wing. Yeah. I'm pretty sure that, when me and one of my friends get in the same car, we should be protected by some sort of law for the preservation of profoundly endangered political ideologies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Hexigrammus posted:Uhh... that was once believed to be the situation in B.C. as well. To be fair, there was some truth in this. She did lose in the riding she originally ran in which happened to be her predecessor's, so she had to be parachuted into Kelowna post-election and had an already-elected MLA give up their seat. Lain Iwakura fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Dec 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:To be fair, there was some truth in this. She did lose in the riding she originally ran in which happened to be her predecessor's, so she had to be parachuted into Kelowna post-election and had an already-elected MLA give up their seat. The voters are never wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Hexigrammus posted:Uhh... that was once believed to be the situation in B.C. as well. And if Adrian Dix replaces Tom Mulcair we'll really be in trouble.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
--
Melian Dialogue fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Feb 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
She also played Brutus for former BC NDP leader Carole James, which is how we ended up with Adrian Dix.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Supposedly the majority of relationships fall apart because of financial issues, so it's not completely crazy to think they weren't completely open with their fiances with one another. People are bad with money, and any situation where one person controls all the finances can often be pretty disastrous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
Finland is proposing mincome and people are pretty sure it's going to pass, will be interesting to watch.(From micome discussion a few pages back) http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/12/06/lift-quality-life-and-economy-finland-champions-universal-basic-income
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:That might matter to the four or five remaining red tories, but the average bitter ender Conservative party member is a total loving poltroon, who would gladly flip off Quebec and vote for Canada's Sarah Palin if they thought she was the right combination of "electable" (read: sheltering them from being accused of sexism), and right wing. As I understand it -- and Pinterest Mom can probably either confirm or deny this -- every riding association in the conservative party has an equally strong vote regardless of how many active members it has, meaning a CPC riding with three active members in Montreal gets just as much sway over the next leader as a riding in rural Alberta with 100 active members. As a result there's potential for Quebec based conservatives to exercise a disproportionate impact on the leadership race. It's one of the reasons that Jean Charest could conceivably become the next Conservative leader, if he so desired.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
Helsing posted:As I understand it -- and Pinterest Mom can probably either confirm or deny this -- every riding association in the conservative party has an equally strong vote regardless of how many active members it has, meaning a CPC riding with three active members in Montreal gets just as much sway over the next leader as a riding in rural Alberta with 100 active members. As a result there's potential for Quebec based conservatives to exercise a disproportionate impact on the leadership race. It's one of the reasons that Jean Charest could conceivably become the next Conservative leader, if he so desired. Isn't Charest deeply unpopular in Quebec now?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Chicken posted:I realize there's not much precedence in Canada for provincial leaders moving directly into federal politics but what's the protocol? Do you have to step down from your provincial office to run for leadership of a party? The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are Tommy Douglas and Robert Stanfield. They both remained Premier of their province throughout their leadership races, and only resigned after they won federal leadership. That was 50 years ago, though, I don't know how it'd fly today. Helsing posted:As I understand it -- and Pinterest Mom can probably either confirm or deny this -- every riding association in the conservative party has an equally strong vote regardless of how many active members it has, meaning a CPC riding with three active members in Montreal gets just as much sway over the next leader as a riding in rural Alberta with 100 active members. As a result there's potential for Quebec based conservatives to exercise a disproportionate impact on the leadership race. It's one of the reasons that Jean Charest could conceivably become the next Conservative leader, if he so desired. Yep. ocrumsprug posted:Isn't Charest deeply unpopular in Quebec now? Certainly not among C/conservative activists, and maybe not even among the population. Remember that he very nearly managed to fend off the PQ in 2012 despite 9 years in power, a deeply corrupt and unraveling government, and months of social unrest, and that the PLQ returned to power just two years later.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:Finland is proposing mincome and people are pretty sure it's going to pass, will be interesting to watch.(From micome discussion a few pages back) That's interesting i can't wait to see the data that comes out of that particular experiment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
It's good some society is at least trying these policies out, even if only to learn that more about the implementation and how humans behave when they benefit from them. Just like how Sweden's attempt to shift the criminality of buying sex had unintended consequences, sometimes the only way to learn about the outcomes of certain policies is to try them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:It's good some society is at least trying these policies out, even if only to learn that more about the implementation and how humans behave when they benefit from them. You say this as if countries actually learn from each other's policy successes or failures. "It's different here". Failed policy pushed by politicians here? It will work here, we have a better financial system. Successful policy from another country? No, things are different here, it wouldn't work, we need a home grown solution.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:You say this as if countries actually learn from each other's policy successes or failures. "It's different here". Failed policy pushed by politicians here? It will work here, we have a better financial system. Successful policy from another country? No, things are different here, it wouldn't work, we need a home grown solution. To be fair, back when Obama was elected in 2008 and the debate over healthcare was getting going the New Yorker ran a pretty good article about the origins of public healthcare systems in various countries. The ultimate point was that public healthcare emerges as an institution in response to specific problems in that country and are all different because of that. "It's different here" is certainly an excuse used to not implement policies, but any policy lifted wholesale from another country without considering the particular context it's being brought into is doomed to fail. Well, I guess it depends on how you define success or failure. In some respects South Africa adapting the reservation system in Canada for the apartheid system was very successful. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
The argument summarized by "it's different here" is a political argument, not a logistical one. It's usually trying to say that it can't be implemented because assholes will politically block it, and the correct answer is to flush the assholes, not the policy plan. If someone has an actual logistical argument to make against a certain policy plan, they'll just make it; there's no need for vague nonsense if you actually know what the gently caress you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 06:40
|
|
|
Helsing posted:As I understand it -- and Pinterest Mom can probably either confirm or deny this -- every riding association in the conservative party has an equally strong vote regardless of how many active members it has, meaning a CPC riding with three active members in Montreal gets just as much sway over the next leader as a riding in rural Alberta with 100 active members. As a result there's potential for Quebec based conservatives to exercise a disproportionate impact on the leadership race. It's one of the reasons that Jean Charest could conceivably become the next Conservative leader, if he so desired. That's certainly still a factor, but I bet she thinks she can split the middle between the Alberta and Ontario factions by appealing to them both as a consensus "mainstream appeal" candidate that could soften the party's image. Then it's her versus Charest, which is Barbie vs. Skeletor from an optics perspective. Also please note that I didn't say this was a successful forthcoming campaign; she is, after all, dumb as a sack of hammers, and sloppy to boot. Just that she's positioning her attack run, as it were.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 08:22
|
|
|
If federal government were to implement mincome, am I correct in assuming that it would either require majority agreement from the provinces, or would provinces be able to opt-out? Most entitlement programs are provincial, so these are the things that would be eliminated if the feds decided to give every Canadian adult $1000 a month, or so. In a way, it means the Provinces are effectively uploading these costs to the feds, but this also means cutting several provincial government jobs. Presumably there would be a kind of phase-in/phase-out program, where the departments are made smaller over the course of a few years, with severance packages and the like for redundant employees. The minimum wage could theoretically be eliminated, or lowered, through a mincome program as well, meaning that if a business CAN staff someone at a much lower wage, they'd be free to do so, because their employees would still have that guaranteed cushion. The flipside being what others have suggested, that workers would have more freedom to pick and choose their work because they don't risk freezing to death because they're not taking the first lovely job to come along.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
As someone that barely knows anything about mincome, can someone explain why anyone would work a borderline minimum wage job over taking advantage of mincome? If the choices are work are 0 hours for $800, or work 80 hours for $1000, I can't imagine much working those hours for such little gain. Wouldn't that than raise the price of living, which would force whatever the mincome level is to raise?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
Cocoham posted:As someone that barely knows anything about mincome, can someone explain why anyone would work a borderline minimum wage job over taking advantage of mincome? If the choices are work are 0 hours for $800, or work 80 hours for $1000, I can't imagine much working those hours for such little gain. Wouldn't that than raise the price of living, which would force whatever the mincome level is to raise? As someone who has spent a period of time unemployed but with enough money that I didn't need to find a job right away, I can field this: unemployment is a miserable existence and brings on crippling depression. I mean, I hope that changes to some degree in a post mincome world because we can automate a ton of low education jobs right now. Eej posted:Well for one thing, if the mincome was $800 and you were working 80 hours for $1000 then your job would be paying you $3.75/hr which is well below minimum wage. Isn't the assumption that we'd scrap the minimum wage and fund mincome using taxes on companies? If you're layering mincome on top of existing wages all you'd be doing is driving up the cost of living. egg tats fucked around with this message at 12:11 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
Well for one thing, if the mincome was $800 and you were working 80 hours for $1000 then your job would be paying you $3.75/hr which is well below minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
Eej posted:Well for one thing, if the mincome was $800 and you were working 80 hours for $1000 then your job would be paying you $3.75/hr which is well below minimum wage. So if I was to work a minimum wage job, mincome is bumping up my income to (minimum wage + mincome welfare)? Otherwise I don't see the incentive to work minimum wage jobs. Like you said, who the gently caress wants to work $3.75/hour when you can live fine not working at all? Cocoham fucked around with this message at 12:56 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 12:45
|
|
|
Cocoham posted:So if I was to work a minimum wage job, mincome is bumping up my income to (minimum wage + mincome welfare)? Otherwise I don't see the incentive to work minimum wage jobs. Like you said, who the gently caress wants to work $3.75/hour when you can live fine not working at all? Nobody wants to work for $3.75 an hour, that's less than half the minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:00
|
|
|
Cocoham posted:So if I was to work a minimum wage job, mincome is bumping up my income to (minimum wage + mincome welfare)? Otherwise I don't see the incentive to work minimum wage jobs. Like you said, who the gently caress wants to work $3.75/hour when you can live fine not working at all? No one is living "fine" on $800/month, that is the catch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Cocoham posted:So if I was to work a minimum wage job, mincome is bumping up my income to minimum wage + mincome welfare? Otherwise I don't see the incentive to work minimum wage jobs. Like you said, who the gently caress wants to work $3.75/hour when you can live fine not working at all, and sit around waiting for the "dream opportunity." At $800 a month, mincome isn't really "living fine" in a lot of places, especially the cities where 800 a month barely covers a bachelor apartment. The idea is that you have this guaranteed cushion of monthly funds that exists regardless of your employment status, so that if an emergency pops up, you're not completely screwed right away, and you also don't have to deal with tedious bureaucracy like in the case of welfare or EI payments. I'm sure a handful of people would be content to find a cheap place or some roommates, and live off their mincome and do nothing but sit in a single room and play WoW and surf porn all day, but I very much doubt the vast majority of people would give up on self-fulfilling productivity. Ideally, it would at least mean a chance for many people to improve their educations, or make it a bit easier to take a risk on a business idea. Cabin fever is a real thing. I'm sure most people will still have their traditional jobs and will still work them, and there will still be a need for some minimum wage grunt work, but not all of it. I guess the real question is, if no one wants to work a particular lovely minimum wage job... does it need to exist?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Liberals to announce that changes to federal tax brackets won’t add up The only surprise is that they're announcing it so soon. If it was just off by a bit, they'd wait until it had been implemented for a year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 13:21
|
|