Election 2015

[Edward Campbell]

Too true.

I suspect that you are correct about the NDP.  I'm not sure people are buying it.

Not so sure that is the complete picture of the Liberals.  While I agree that they want more of the NDP share of the vote, I suspect that this latest move is to appeal to those that believe in stimulus spending.  Done right it could work.  I'd rather see us have a deficit by investing in infrastructure than in 15$ a day daycare.    It also eliminates the "how to pay for it argument" before it happens.  It is an interesting move.

Yes, I suspect the CPC is hoping for a split.  But so far I'm not sure they are happy with what they were hoping for.  But there is still plenty of time.

I know I keep saying this over and over and over again, but ...

                                                           

                                                                                                ... and there are still 7 and a bit "long times" to go until election day.

 

[Edward Campbell]

For those who want to raise the HST/GST ...

I know the Fraser Institute is not everyone's cup of tea, but, I suggest, it is no more (nor less) biased than the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and it's research is pretty rigorous. This article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Toronto Sun reports on a Fraser Institute report on taxes:

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/08/27/taxes-eat-up-42-of-average-canadian-familys-income-fraser-institute

Taxes eat up 42% of average Canadian family's income: Fraser Institute

JEREMY APPEL, TORONTO SUN

FIRST POSTED: THURSDAY, AUGUST 27, 2015

TORONTO - Canadians retain just 21% of their income after paying the taxman and covering the cost of necessities, according to a Fraser Institute study.

Taxes gobble up a whopping 42% of the average Canadian family's income. About 37% of income goes to cover housing, food and clothing.

"We've found ... that over the last five decades or so, the tax bill for the average Canadian family has grown dramatically," said study coauthor Charles Lammam.

The study took into account taxes paid to federal, provincial and municipal governments. It found that the average Canadian family spent 21% of its income on housing, 11% on food and 5% on clothing.

According to the study:

* Taxes have grown much more rapidly than any other single expenditure for the average Canadian family, i n c r e a sing by 1,886% from 1961 to 2014.

* Expenditures on shelter increased by 1,366%, clothing by 819%, and food by 561% during the same time period.

* Tax increases also greatly outpaced the increase in the Consumer Price Index --a measure of the average that consumers pay for food, shelter, clothing, transportation, education and other items--which grew by 697% from 1961 to 2014.

* In 1961, 33.5% of an average family's income went to pay taxes and 56.5% was allocated for basic necessities.

* In 2014, the average Canadian family earned an income of $79,010 and paid taxes of $33,272 to all levels of government. In 1961, the average family had an income of $5,000 and paid $1,675 in taxes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------​

TAX BILL OF THE AVERAGE CANADIAN FAMILY (FAMILIES AND UNATTACHED INDIVIDUALS), 2014

In dollars ($) As % of total taxes

TAXES

Income taxes 10,166 30.6%

Payroll & health taxes 7,158 21.5%

Sales taxes 4,806 14.4%

Property taxes 3,478 10.5%

Profit tax 3,591 10.8%

Liquor, tobacco, amusement, & other excise taxes1,763 5.3%

Auto, fuel, & motor vehicle licence taxes 834 2.5%

Other taxes 803 2.4%

Natural resource taxes 405 1.2%

Import duties 268 0.8%

Total taxes $33,272

Total cash income $79,010

Taxes as a percentage of cash income 42.1%

Source: The Fraser Institute's Canadian Tax Simulator, 2015

I'm not sure the CPC can make political hay from this: Canadians tend, I think, to be somewhat non differential when it comes to taxes and they blame all governments/parties (national, provincial and municipal) that are in power equally.

But it does raise and interesting question: how much is enough?

 

[Edward Campbell]

Maybe, just maybe, M Trudeau is going to address fiscal policy, if insideHALTON.com has it right.

The article says, "The Liberal leader's infrastructure policy, to be unveiled Thursday in Oakville, Ont., is expected to include significant new funding for:

— Public transit and transportation;

— Affordable housing;

— Helping communities adapt to climate change, which has been blamed for billions in damage from flooding, wildfires and hailstorms.

Trudeau's infrastructure announcement goes hand in hand with his refusal to commit to immediately balancing the federal budget, should he win the Oct. 19 election.

And it's a big part of Trudeau's attempt to position the Liberals as the only party willing to run short-term deficits to goose the stagnant economy."


Of his three priorities, if that is what they are, I support borrowing, massively, for public transit and for transportation infrastructure (roads and bridges) maintenance. I am OK with public housing .... but I think we do it all wrong in Canada (and in America, Australia, Britain, France and Hong Kong, too). I suspect that "helping communities adapt to climate change" will just be a Liberal slush fund to reward cities that support M Trudeau and to push wind farms in Ontario.

But, good on him ... 

I think M Trudeau's plan actually worries the CPC a bit. Enough, anyway, to prompt this ad, which appeared online today:

 

[kratz]

ref:  CTV.ca

With the debate over ABC on this site and the LPC policy announcement for veterans this week, it's interesting to read the CPC is looking for veterans willing to publicly support the CPC during the campaign.

Conservatives looking for veterans to sing praises of Harper: email
Murray Brewster, The Canadian Press
Published Thursday, August 27, 2015 5:12AM EDT 

TORONTO -- An email being circulated among former Canadian soldiers suggests federal Conservatives are looking for a few happy, satisfied veterans to appear in television ads backing the prime minister, The Canadian Press has learned.

The email appears to have been written by Kris Sims, who is on leave from her role as director of communications for Veterans Affairs Minister Erin O'Toole in order to work for the party during the campaign.

In it, she asks to be connected with ex-soldiers who are willing to appear on camera and prepared "to say in their own words why (Stephen) Harper is the best choice for Canada, based on their military experience and the threats we face in the world."

The email, a copy of which was obtained by The Canadian Press, goes on to say it is intended to counter Public Service Alliance of Canada ads that "say the NDP and Liberals are the best for Canadian Armed Forces Veterans."

...more at link

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Globe and Mail now has it's own election prediction, which it will update weekly. Currently it predicts that:

Even with NDP leading polls, Conservatives projected to win more seats

Paul Fairie
Special to The Globe and Mail

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 26, 2015 7:35PM EDT

If the NDP continue to poll well, showing leads in four of the last six publicly-released polls, why does the Globe’s Election Forecast suggest that the Conservatives have a higher probability of winning the most seats? The important thing to remember is that not all votes are created equal in terms of their ability to convert into seats.

The NDP’s strength, like in 2011, remains in Quebec. In the latest Angus Reid poll, the New Democrats are polling at a robust 51 per cent of the vote. Yet, in 2011, they turned 43 per cent of the province’s vote into winning 59 of the 75 seats. If we accept the Angus Reid number, increasing their vote share by 8 per cent around the province doesn’t leave them with much room to grow seat-wise: a seat is a seat, won by 1 vote or 20,000.

At the same time, the Conservatives also remain reasonably strong in Ontario. While certainly down from their 44 per cent vote share in 2011, they remain marginally in the lead in the province in a number of recent polls. In the latest Angus Reid survey, the Conservatives polled 35 per cent to the NDP’s 33 and in the Nanos poll released a day earlier, the Conservatives led the Liberals 39 per cent to 32.

History reminds us that this has happened before. In 1979, the Pierre Trudeau-led Liberals won 40 per cent of the vote, compared to the Joe Clark-led PCs’ 36 per cent share. Despite this, the Conservatives won 22 more seats than the Liberals and formed a brief-lived minority government. One reason the Liberals were able to win a larger share of the vote despite losing the seat count was the result in Quebec, where the Liberals won an astounding 61 per cent of the vote, capturing 67 of the province’s 75 seats.

Paul Fairie is a University of Calgary political scientist who studies voter behaviour, who designed The Globe’s Election Forecast.


In another article, the Globe and Mail reports that, "Canadians believe economy is in recession, OK with deficit: poll"

The article says, that "Canadians think the country is in recession, according to a new poll, and a majority supports the idea of the federal government running a deficit to stimulate the economy."

 

[Remius]

I think M Trudeau's plan actually worries the CPC a bit.

I think you are correct in that assessment.  I think some of the smart advisers he may have surrounded himself with are making their mark.  His plan, to me, seems rather sound and for once honest.  Whether that translates into more votes remains to be seen.  I would like the CPC to communicate their economic policy a bit more...I don't know how to explain it...but the stay the course message, isn't hitting home enough and may get stale.

 

[Edward Campbell]

It's not Labour Day yet, and, in contrast to what the Globe and Mail's polling may suggest (see above), the Toronto Star has data that suggests that an NDP majority is within reach.

 

[Rocky Mountains]

But the Red Star polls are always wonky. The Red Star poll of August 24 has the NDP lead at the expense of the Conservatives while the Angus Reid poll of the same day has it at the expense of the Liberals

Red Star
  NDP  40
  Liberals  30
  Conservatives  23

Angus Reid
  NDP  37
  Liberal  24
  Conservative  30

I simply don't believe the Red Star poll.

http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/poll-tracker/2015/index.html

 

[Edward Campbell]

As I expected, the CPC is starting to "attack" using the Trudeau<>Wynne<>Trudeau notion:

I think Ontario is divided: the inner cities and some suburbs are left (Liberal/NDP) and Premier Wynne and M Trudeau are popular and the real 'enemy' is Thomas Mulcair and the NDP; in other suburbs and in small town and rural Ontario I believe Premier Wynne is less popular and Pierre Poilievre's new ad might work very well indeed. We'll need to see if other Ontario CPC candidates follow suit.

 

[Brad Sallows]

An earlier article by Stephen Gordon at the National Post (21 Jul) explains why more spending is not appropriate for this recession and is referenced by Kevin Milligan at Maclean's in an article discussing infrastructure.

Summary: a plan for steady long term infrastructure spending is a good idea, but not if deficit spending is required.  The policy point goes to the CPC and NDP this time.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Earlier I wrote: "Economically feasible" should be interpreted as "profitable" ("loss-less").  If it needs an operating subsidy, it isn't economically feasible."

And dapaterson proposed that "By that logic, we should only have toll roads, since highways and streets require ongoing maintenance, snow removal etc - they therefore require operating subsidies and, by your logic, are not economically feasible."

The distinction is that roads are public, and rails are not.  And I don't mean the facade of ownership: if I buy one of the fancy pickups the railroad companies use, I still won't be allowed to use even publicly owned rails.  I support public funding of genuinely public infrastructure.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Wynne (and others) might want to think about getting out of the way.

Supporting pipelines and other development isn't going to alter the short term arithmetic, but might serve them better in the longer term.

 

[dapaterson]

Earlier I wrote: "Economically feasible" should be interpreted as "profitable" ("loss-less").  If it needs an operating subsidy, it isn't economically feasible."

And dapaterson proposed that "By that logic, we should only have toll roads, since highways and streets require ongoing maintenance, snow removal etc - they therefore require operating subsidies and, by your logic, are not economically feasible."

The distinction is that roads are public, and rails are not.  And I don't mean the facade of ownership: if I buy one of the fancy pickups the railroad companies use, I still won't be allowed to use even publicly owned rails.  I support public funding of genuinely public infrastructure.

But then we're subsidizing truckers vs rail companies, and buses vs passenger rail.

 

[a_majoor]

In theory truckers and busses (and car drivers) pay for the roads with taxes on fuel. In actual practice, fuel taxes go into the general revenue pool to spend on "infrastructure" like downtown sports arenas and performing arts centres......

 

[Edward Campbell]

ref:  CTV.ca

With the debate over ABC on this site and the LPC policy announcement for veterans this week, it's interesting to read the CPC is looking for veterans willing to publicly support the CPC during the campaign.

...more at link

But, in the Globe and Mail, editorial cartoonist Brian Gable wonders how just well it's working:

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorial-cartoons-for-august-2015/article25744115/

 

[George Wallace]

There already exists a Veterans group on FB that support the Conservative.

 

[Edward Campbell]

There already exists a Veterans group on FB that support the Conservative.

Agreed, George, but my sense is that they aren't getting much traction (media attention, anyway). Additionally, they're not "news." Being for someone or something is rarely as newsworthy (attention getting) as being and demonstrating against that someone or something.

Going beyond that, as the Ottawa Citizen say "To deficit or not to deficit — that is the election question du jour." I suspect that the veterans might, if they are a bit smarter than they look on their social media pages, get some traction, on either or both sides of the NVC/benefits issue, if they focus almost all of their attention ~ and whatever money they have and are allowed to spend ~ on one, single constiyuency: Durham, where Veterans' Affairs Minister Erin O'Toole (a popular MP, a cabinet minister, and a potential future CPC leadership candidate) is running. If the CPC thinks that a sitting minister might be knocked off by a single issue, special interest group then they might care enough to address that group's grievances ... maybe.

 

[George Wallace]

On the other hand, perhaps they are a more tempered group who feel that the groups like ABC do not represent "ALL" veterans, who are using the wrong tactics, tactics that do more harm to veterans concerns than help.  They may feel that the tactics of the groups like ABC alienate veterans in the eyes of the Public.  Perhaps they prefer not to be like ABC and more along the lines of the "quiet professional" who is more likely to discuss their concerns than  make a public spectacle of themselves. 

 

[Kirkhill]

On the other hand, perhaps they are a more tempered group who feel that the groups like ABC do not represent "ALL" veterans, who are using the wrong tactics, tactics that do more harm to veterans concerns than help.  They may feel that the tactics of the groups like ABC alienate veterans in the eyes of the Public.  Perhaps they prefer not to be like ABC and more along the lines of the "quiet professional" who is more likely to discuss their concerns than  make a public spectacle of themselves.

George, you are describing the fate of all conservatives.  By inclination they tend to be quiet, undemonstrative and solitary and seek the quiet life, although highly disputatious.  Not the best fodder for a movement. 

 

[C-Aitchison]

George, you are describing the fate of all conservatives.  By inclination they tend to be quiet, undemonstrative and solitary and seek the quiet life, although highly disputatious.  Not the best fodder for a movement.

Unless they're university students. The Conservatives here in KW, at both UW and WLU are moving hard and fast.