• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Ontario Election Thread

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Hudak is so douchey, it's almost as if the only other job he's ever had was as a loser power-tripping district manager for a bunch of Wal-Mart stores or something....

OH WAIT. Yes that IS the only other job he's had. I'm sure he'll do a fine job rolling back our province.

The question isn't whether the province will be "rolled back" but by whom. It does look like the population (72%) has finally, after several Liberal terms, decided that it is time "for a change in government" (link) according to a poll. This scenario is looking more and more like a repeat of the early 90s.
 
Stop Bill C-10

Spinsah

TRIBE Member
I'd be cautious to infer much from that one Ipsos-Reid poll, but to be sure, with such a low turnout all but inevitable, the PC is currently firing up their base with plans of spending cuts and public sector job slashing. If the Torys get the vote out and make some inroads in the 905, that might enough for them to roll into a majority.

However, the campaign has just begun and there's a lot of dynamics at work. It's entirely possible we see something similar happen as what occurred in Alberta, as progressive voters lined up in droves to hold their nose and vote for Redford's conservatives to block the Wildrose upstarts. It's possible that Horwath has turned off enough of her base with her pocketbook populism and election forcing that the stage has been set for such an exodus. In fact, I think in Toronto, she's already lost much of the progressive urban vote.

I'd urge everyone, as disenfranchised as they might be to go out and vote. Hudak is counting on many of you staying home in order to take office.
 

SneakyPete

TRIBE Member
Rob Ford is running as NDP in Sudbury.

Ontario NDP candidate in Sudbury looks kind of like a young Rob Ford | canada.com

joe_cimino.jpg
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

basketballjones

TRIBE Member
If Hudak takes office, I'm honestly gonna slit my wrists. The guy is so fake and creepy....
vs what i have just posted?


you seemed to have gotten fat off of the complete shit show that has been liberal rule

but cutting back makes you want to slit your wrists??

then again, your fave guy left his fucking country to make sure he didnt pay any taxes.....yet wants everyone else to drown in taxes to make him look good

oh by the way its bono
 

kirstenmeows

TRIBE Member
Premier Dad is no longer leading the liberals, it's a new era and I suppose
Wynne deserves a chance. Harris 2.0 (ie Hudak) scares me even more. Not sure sure where I'll go but I can guarantee it won't be blue.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Premier Dad is no longer leading the liberals, it's a new era and I suppose
Wynne deserves a chance. Harris 2.0 (ie Hudak) scares me even more. Not sure sure where I'll go but I can guarantee it won't be blue.

It seems like the marketing has paid off.

Most of the nuts and bolts policy decisions are made by people outside of the few people in "the government". There is simply no way that a Kathleen Wynn or Hudak etc can have the the breadth of knowledge required to come up with reasonable options for any particular area, eg defense finance education etc. These people are managers who depend on information from another group of people (advisors) and it is these who drive policy with their ability to shape the options available for the government to choose from.

You can find out who these people are but generally they are senior civil service bureacrats and people with extensive industry knowledge. Some of the latter are "consultants" and/or have strong affiliation with the political parties. These people have low turnover, with bureaucrats continuing to serve regardless of which government is elected, and, in the case of political parties, an entire machinery exists which only acts to keep their relationships within power.

So, yes Mcguinty is no longer leading. However the group of people who put Dalton in charge are still there, and they are the same people who put Wynn in charge, and the same set of relationships exist within that Liberal party as well as at the senior levels of the civil service.

It's fine though if you just simply prefer these group of people. I'm just really really glad at this point that Smitherman failed at his mayoral bid, which should tell you what I think of how this group of people have used their power.
 

Spinsah

TRIBE Member
You can find out who these people are but generally they are senior civil service bureacrats and people with extensive industry knowledge. Some of the latter are "consultants" and/or have strong affiliation with the political parties. These people have low turnover, with bureaucrats continuing to serve regardless of which government is elected, and, in the case of political parties, an entire machinery exists which only acts to keep their relationships within power.
By definition the bureaucracy exists to support the delivery of programs and services and is not politically affiliated. The Secretary of Cabinet, not the Premier is the head of the Ontario Public Service (the bureaucracy).

In theory, major policies are defined at party conventions, this is true even for a sitting government. However, the Office of the Premier, often sets the government agenda and within this office there is a lot more churn. To wit, when Kathleen Wynne assumed office, most of this office staff turned over which is why you hear about the issues around Dalton McGuinty's Chief of Staff's handling of gas plants emails prior to this transition. The Office of the Premier as well as the staff of all sitting MPPs are by definition more political entities and are not 'senior civil service bureaucrats'.

Of course, the government and opposition parties often commission studies by consultants (i.e. The Drummond Report) which inform policy. There are also consultants and agencies that are hired by government and opposition parties to aid in communications, campaigning, policy development etc. These are some of the power brokers you might be speaking of and they often work for different parties and levels of government depending what way the wind and money is blowing.

It is important to note, however, that these senior civil servants you speak of are not defining high level or even 'nuts and bolts' party policy - in that respect, your statement is categorically false.
 

I_bRAD

TRIBE Member
Greens seem to have a pretty good plan. Assuming I like my local green candidate when I meet her that's probably where my vote is going. Greens seem to be somewhat conservative, but actually progressive. Works for me.
 

DJ Vuvu Zela

TRIBE Member
A million jobs? Heck, why not a zillion?

One of my all-time favourite comments by an economist goes like this:
“If two people claim to have seen a UFO, with one person claiming that it was large and the other person claiming that it was small, should we assume that the UFO was medium-sized?”
This great comment — actually by two economists, Brian MacLean and Mark Setterfield — reminds us of a basic, often-neglected law of economics: The fact that people assert something to be true doesn’t mean that it is.
Indeed, Ontario Progressive Conservative Leader Tim Hudak claims he has a plan that will create One Million Jobs. Everywhere he goes in the current election campaign, he stands in front of a backdrop that proclaims One Million Jobs.
Nowhere does he mention that those jobs are imaginary.
His job creation strategy is based heavily on the notion that cutting corporate taxes causes businesses to create jobs — a theory that relies, according to Nobel-Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, on the “confidence fairy.”
It’s a striking comment on how far to the right the mainstream media has drifted that Hudak’s ‘plan’ is being treated somewhat seriously.
While media commentators have expressed skepticism, they still refer to the plan as “bold” — an adjective that gives it more credence than, for instance, “nutty” would.
Well, yes, bold it is — in the same way that it would be bold for Hudak to say he’ll create one million jobs by cutting Ontarians’ consumption of French fries.
But what makes Hudak’s plan veer beyond nutty to insidious is the fact that it’s coupled with a plan to cut 100,000 public sector jobs. (That’s how he plans to pay for the tax cuts that, allegedly, would create the jobs.)
Unlike the imaginary ones, these public sector jobs — mostly in education, health care and social services — are real jobs held by real workers providing real services to real people. This will all go, Hudak pledges boldly.
So Hudak’s job creation plan begins by eliminating 100,000 jobs, leaving him obliged to create even more new jobs — 1.1 million. Since they’re imaginary, this turns out to be easy.
The first 500,000 are the easiest — that’s how many jobs Hudak assumes would be created if he simply continued the policies put in place by Liberal governments in Ontario over the past decade.
The federal Finance department — not known for progressive economics, particularly in the Harper era — concluded that government spending on the poor and unemployed creates substantially more jobs than cutting corporate taxes.
He goes on to give a detailed breakdown of exactly how many jobs would be created by various policies he’s proposing, starting with cutting the corporate tax rate from 11.5 per cent to 8 per cent. This would generate 119,808 jobs, he contends.
The very precision of this — not a ballpark figure like 120,000 jobs but exactly 119,808 jobs — makes the plan sound almost scientific.
And while Hudak himself may have no more credibility than a frequent observer of the Loch Ness monster, he backs up his job numbers by referring to an analysis done for his party by the respected Conference Board of Canada.
But let’s look at how truly dishonest this is.
Yes, the PCs did pay the Conference Board to do an analysis. But Pedro Antunes, deputy chief economist at the Conference Board, told me in an interview that the Conference Board is not endorsing the Million Jobs plan — nor did it even see the plan.
Antunes also acknowledged that data produced by the federal Finance department shows that far more jobs are created by government spending than by corporate tax reductions.
For instance, a 2009 Finance department chart estimates that if Ottawa spent $1 billion on support for unemployed and low-income individuals, it would generate 18,755 jobs. The same chart shows that if Ottawa gave up $1 billion in revenue in corporate income tax reductions, this would create only 3,310 jobs.
In other words, the federal Finance department — not known for progressive economics, particularly in the Harper era — concluded that government spending on the poor and unemployed creates substantially more jobs than cutting corporate taxes.
When I asked Antunes if the same pattern would be true in Ontario, he replied: “You’re absolutely right. There are economic levers that could be bigger than corporate tax cuts.”
But Antunes noted that, in its analysis for the PCs, it only looked at one policy lever — tax cuts — and only looked at it in isolation. The 13-page analysis points out that the positive impacts associated with tax cuts are based on a big assumption — that the government doesn’t counter the tax cuts by reducing spending.
But Hudak is planning to do just that — to make up for the revenue lost from the tax cuts by removing 100,000 public sector jobs from the payroll. Antunes acknowledged that the Conference Board didn’t take the loss of the 100,000 jobs into consideration in its analysis. “We didn’t look into that,” he said.
He also agreed that big spending cuts — such as slashing 100,000 public sector jobs — could more than offset the economic benefits of lowering taxes.
In other words, we could well end up with fewer jobs.
If 100,000 jobs are created every time Tim Hudak sees a UFO, should we assume that we’ll soon reach full employment — or that we can all just relax and enjoy French fries?
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

wickedken

TRIBE Member
By definition the bureaucracy exists to support the delivery of programs and services and is not politically affiliated. The Secretary of Cabinet, not the Premier is the head of the Ontario Public Service (the bureaucracy).

There should be an "in theory" regarding this as well. Not politically affiliated does not mean "has no politics".

In theory, major policies are defined at party conventions, this is true even for a sitting government. However, the Office of the Premier, often sets the government agenda and within this office there is a lot more churn. To wit, when Kathleen Wynne assumed office, most of this office staff turned over which is why you hear about the issues around Dalton McGuinty's Chief of Staff's handling of gas plants emails prior to this transition. The Office of the Premier as well as the staff of all sitting MPPs are by definition more political entities and are not 'senior civil service bureaucrats'.

Of course, the government and opposition parties often commission studies by consultants (i.e. The Drummond Report) which inform policy. There are also consultants and agencies that are hired by government and opposition parties to aid in communications, campaigning, policy development etc. These are some of the power brokers you might be speaking of and they often work for different parties and levels of government depending what way the wind and money is blowing.

It is important to note, however, that these senior civil servants you speak of are not defining high level or even 'nuts and bolts' party policy - in that respect, your statement is categorically false.

I agree with some of what you are saying but have a wider view of how a government creates policy. I don't think everything is as out as you seem to believe.
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
I'm voting NDP this time. It's utter nonsense what's going on right now.

Sure throw away your vote :)

I saw a rep from the Green Party on the Agenda on Wednesday and really wanted him to shine. However he did not and I am still no closer to any choice.
 

Spinsah

TRIBE Member
There should be an "in theory" regarding this as well. Not politically affiliated does not mean "has no politics".



I agree with some of what you are saying but have a wider view of how a government creates policy. I don't think everything is as out as you seem to believe.
Ideology works on a much deeper level than simple political affiliations, and insofar as it is the role of the civil service is to provide stability on not throw out the baby with the bath water each time a new government takes office. Of course, there are forces within government itself to seek program consistency and development. This is a good thing.
 

praktik

TRIBE Member

Thats the biggest, most visible impact - but if any tribers happen to know people working in the most affected ministries, they're still climbing out from under the shadow of those cuts.

WHat public employees have to work with is just sad - nobody wants to invest in better tools for fear of wasting "taxpayer dollars" - forgetting that better tools mean better work and more work and less fucking around with broken systems that had longer upgrade cycles than they should have...
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
Top