I would prefer a larger rebate on my childcare expenses. Single income homes while they sound great are not a practical option. One cannot afford to live in urban areas with only one income unless you either live in a slum or make enough to live in a mansion.

I am not confident that a national daycare is the solution. I would rather see a growth in not-for-profit daycares associated with Schools or better after school programs for older kids (grade one and up).

Yet another thing to think about when you go line up at the polls. I predict Scope sales will skyrocket after the election, as every Canadian tries to get that nasty taste out of their mouth.

Quebec has a 7 dollar a day provincially run program that seems pretty good.

And yeah, T.O. house prices - $490,000 is now the average price of a detached home anywhere in Toronto, and that includes the crappy neighbourhoods!

What does that poll really mean? Does it mean our politicians are more corrupt? Does it mean we think they are more corrupt? Does it mean other nation's politicians are better at pulling the wool over their electorate's eyes?


Right. It really doesn't mean anything.

I agree that single income homes may not be practical for everyone, but they are for some. Why should people that elect to put their kids in daycare receive government money for doing so when people that choose to stay at home receive nothing? By giving both sets of parents the money to spend as they see fit, it levels the playing field.

Article: "Canadians believe political parties are the most corrupt institution in the country"

It means a sample of Canadians believe politicians are the most corrupt people in Canada.

Read the article again... yes that quote is in the first paragraph but the rest of the article compares different country's views on corruption in their governements.

It is an oddly written article.

I don't follow you. The first part of the article says Canadians don't believe in their politicians. The second part goes on to say we're tied with the Americans, but we're not as cynical as the Israelis. The next part says that Canadians don't believe politicians will get any better. Then it ends with how the survey was conducted.

That doesn't change the fact that, when asked who were the most corrupted people in Canada, most surveyed Canadians said their politicians, which is what the article was alluding to.

Perhaps it's just me... whatever.

Perhaps in the interests of letting things cool down a bit on the election front, you should all cruise over to Rick Mercer's Blog and have a laugh or two at the photoshopped pictures of Martin, Harper, et al. And while you are there make sure you read Paul Martin's Christmas letter to the nation.

Yeah, I didn't really post that because I wanted to argue about the nuances of the article. I was more interested in spurring debate about the state of our political climate, and whether people really believe that all politians are corrupt.

Perhaps if I start it off anew, it might spur some conversation.

*Ahem* Political corruption sucks. Discuss. :D

:lol: no problem.

I think you find it difficult to find anyone (other those who benefit from corruption) that will defend political corruption.

The question is do we see all politicians the same?

Do we see ALL Liberal party politicians as equal in the corruption scandal? Do we see the other parties as being corrupt?

Personally, I think there will always be some form of corruption in government. The key is to what extent will it exist. To me, Gomery is refreshing... perverse as that may sound. It shows that corruption can be discovered and ferreted out.

What scares me more is the sort of corruption that never gets discovered or that is discovered but spun out of existence.

Of course the reverse is also true. A lot of time can be wasted trying to find corruption that doesn't exist. This is usually in an effort to score political points. This is almost as bad a corruption itself.

I'd have to disagree with your assessment on the single income option. My street has a fair number of one income families. Some strategies employed have been to rent out the basement as an apartment, or take in a Homestay student (quite a few of these - they are usually japanese girls living here for half a year or so to learn english. So the homeowner gets around $600/m for them).

My street is a fairly typical older neighbourhood, with a mix of single detached/or semi styled streetcar houses from the 1920's. The cost of a semi is about $400K. Neither a slum nor Forest Hill. I can itemize 8 households on my block who do the single income schtick.

For us, we both worked, and powersaved. Inlaws took care of the kids while they were very young. As soon as we discovered that inlaws were not appropriate homework monitors, we took the financial hit, and my wife retired to stay home. Today, she is volunteering on a field trip for my 8 yo son's class to a downtown green house (at UofT).

I was exagerating... I will admit.

When my son was born we were renting a house in North York. My wife stayed home and opened a daycare so she could stay home and make money. She returned work when we bought our house and moved to Riverdale... had just entered Jr. Kindergarten.

When our daughter was born, my wife was just starting back at school. She both worked and went to school. Her mother looked after our daughter on school days and our son was in daycare. Money was very tight.

We do not have the space in our house to either rent out a room or make a basement apartment... We were lucky that her job permitted her to have the baby with her and that her mother was able to care for the baby while she was at school. We could never have afforded to send both our kids to daycare at the time without both of us working and even then it would have been tight.

I know a few other people who are stay at home in our area but their spouse is pulling in over 150K.

I would still argue that for average income earners (i.e. those who are in the 40 to 50K range) it just isn't a practical option for a parent to stay home.

You know, having watching the french language debate two elections in a row, I've come to a depressing conclusion. It's sad that the most eloquent, well spoken, and PERHAPS intelligent politician in Canada happens to be the leader of the Bloc Quebecois.

If only he could channel those powers for the forces of good :p

I agree... too bad he isn't a Federalist.

More political corruption!!! (well if it benefits me.)

It think one of the best preventions for it in a democracy like ours is actualy having governments that change, rather than the same party for long periods of time + more power with the auditor general and power to actually convict those who engage in corruption. (why has no one gone to jail for adscam yet?)

Give it time... Gomery hasn't finished and the RCMP has only really started their investigation since the release of Gomery 1.

Harper and the NDP
 

I think this might just turn out bad for the Liberals...
I think I suggested earlier in this thread that if Harper were to come out and say he could work with NDP in a minority situation it would bode well for both his party and the Conservatives.

Guess what?

Harper just came out saying he could work with the NDP.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...lDecision2006/

Of course the NDP is still campaigning agianst the Conservative... they have more to loose if they don't. But once the election is done, I see Layton willing to work with whoever is in power to negotiate for the policies he would like to see implimented. He has proven himself time and again, to be an amazing consensus builder (both federally and at the municiple level).

what will it take to make him cross the floor? It's not unheard of.. rather common in Canadian politics.

Debate is tonight. Conservatives have a 9 point lead in the polls. Is that scary?

pluses of Conservative gov't: reduced taxes... northern security, income splitting

minuses; reform agenda at fore-front, Kyoto accord out the window, foreing policy back to Mulroney era toadying to the yanks. abortion rights gone?

My neighbourhood is so staunchly NDP provincially, I am very curious to see how things turn out.

Interesting how the Liberals in my riding of Burnaby-Douglas FINALLY decided, after 12 years in power, to decide to put post-secondary education on the election platform.

I see this as a pointless flail in attempt to trick people with their 50/50 plan (pay 50% of 1st year, and 50% of last year's tuition). I don't expect them to follow through with it, and current post-sec students won't benefit at all.

I wish post secondary education were a more important issue for the feds. There's a reason my voter demographic has the lowest turnout of all... They aren't catering to us at all.

actually this is important to me as well. When I was in first year, tuition was $770. that plus residence fees or rent in later years could be earned by working in the summer.

I no longer think it's true that a student can finance his year by working through the summer. My oldest son is in grade 11, after next year, he has to choose a university. I really want him to experience residence or renting with housemates, rather than commuting from home. But with tuition hovering around $6,000 and up, added to room and board, there is no way that he can earn his year during the summer.

Any break that can be eeked out of any party will be appreciated, and may sway my vote. Unfortunately, bottom line considerations have replaced my idealism.

"We want change!"

(But we are doing the best of the G8, the dollar is strong, unemployment is low, interests rates are miniscule, our standard of living is fantastic, we're running surpluses, and we're not involved in the bone-head war)

"uhmmm... we want change!"

:)

Yeah... I have a problem with that as well. Actually, most Conservatives, if you ask them how they are doing ecomomically would have to say that the Liberals have done a lot of good.

I think if we were a 2 party system as with the US, the Liberals would win in a walk, based solely on the economic performance. But the socially left-centre vote is really split between the liberals, NDP, Bloc and even Green now, while the Conservatives have a lock on the 1/3 of the rest of the population.

It'll be a close one!

I am not sure I agree with you on this.

I think it is important to note that the Conservative growth has come directly from the Liberals. If what you suggest is true, we would see the Conservatives number holding steady while the NDP and Bloc numbers grow.

Currently, as with most of the election the Bloc and NDP have held steady.


I do agree that what you suggest may be true for individual ridings but not on the nation as whole.


Here is the latest Globe and Mail/CTV poll: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/speci...2006/poll.html

Conservatives: 37%
Liberals: 29%
NDP: 17%
Bloc: 13%

Here is a Globe and Mail report on the poll:

I think I am going to go with my gut on this one.

I have voted for all of the parties at one time or another in my short but exciting life.

I have no joy with the liberals and their political tactics.
I remember what Brian Mulroney did to this country under the PC flag.
I am not in Quebec.

Therefore, I think I am going to vote NDP on this one. Their social policy stance comes closest to my own.

I am also comforted in knowing (hoping now) that we will have a minority government. I like the idea, where everyone has to work together to make this crazy place work. I think that minority governments more closely represent the citizens, and take away power from the PM and cabinet.

I wish that there was a political party that matched my ideology perfectly, so I wouldn't have to feel so troubled. The good news is that I am not a Sheeple, and I am informed and educated.

Wow. The Conservatives are gaining ground that puts them in potential majority territory. While I am certain I could stomach a Conservative minority if it came down to it, I don't think I would be happy at all with a Conservative majority.

Given the infighting and defeatism that seems to be swirling in the Liberal party things could get worse. This article in today's Globe and Mail shows that the Chretien/Martin camps are still not united. Martin doesn't seem to have any control over his caucus.

Looks like Layton used private healthcare for a minor operation. He says he "wasn't aware" it was a private clinic and besides, everybody was going there.
Funny that the champion of public went private.
http://tinyurl.com/cfe9y

I know that clinic. One of my Mom's boyriends had his hernia done there back in the 70s and my father-in-law went there in the 90s.

I had no idea it was private until a couple of years ago.

It doesn't look good on Jack but so what? It isn't like he's an habitual user of the private system. Additionally, he has stated that it isn't private clinics he is against, just private clinics that use public money. It seems this particular clinic, originally opened to serve veterans, was grandfathered when Universal healthcare was brought in.

I could care less where he goes to get his boils lanced as long as he pays for it himself.

I laughed at that one. The only trump card Layton had to play against the other 3 was his integrity. Said integrity just took a hit.

Meanwhile, Tory candidates are being arrested for smuggling in BC!

Give Jack a break on the clinic thing.

Everyone who has a hernia goes there and it's paid by OHIP, so what.

I am still undecided who I am going to vote for, mind you, it won't be the NDP, that's for sure.

My riding (Parkdale High Park) will most likely switch from Liberal to NDP. The conservatives just don't do well here.

We'll see.

Normally, I would vote liberal, and I do like them when it comes to the economy, but I feel that they are soft on crime, and I don't like the way they parachuted Michael Ignatieff into Etobicoke Lakeshore. The guy has lived in the states for 30 years, but because he's a pretty boy and an "intellectual" (whatever that means) they played dirty pool and would not accept the nomination of two other people who LIVE in the riding (one guy is an engineer with an MBA and has been active in the community for 20 years, but no, we want the "intellectual", the next Trudeau.)

Well, it pisses me off and it's not even my riding.

It's funny, most of the pundits I heard on the CBC, from all sides of the political spectrum, seemed willing to give Layton a pass on this one. I think they'd rather send their time getting their licks in on Paul Martin.

Besides, Liberals aside, they are going to have to work with Layton if there is a minority government. No need to burn bridges.


I heard Ducieppe on CBC Radio this morning saying that if he forms the official opposition he would seek to bring down the govenment in a non-confidence vote the first chance he had.

I have to admit, I am shocked at the surge in the polls for the Conservatives in Quebec of all places. They may actually win some seats.


In the end, if the Conservatives win a majority I will be pissed.

Ah, see, back on my first post on this threat, post 48, I predicted that the bloc would not do as well in Quebec as everyone thought.

Of course, I did predict that they would turn to the liberals, so I guess I am only half right.

Half a star for me.

They are still going to do well. They are still in shape to get more seats than last time. It's just that the Liberals will lose seats to the Conservative rather than the bloc... very few saw this happening.

I still find it hard to believe that people are buying this new Stephen Harper that is being served to us. I don't think he's changes at all from the last election (or even his reform days for that matter).

I guess Canadians are really that ready for change. I guess if you say it enough, people start to believe it.

Stephen has not changed one bit. But he's doing things smarter this time.

He's keeping his cards close to his chest and he's being very careful not to say or do anything stupid. He's taken a page right out of the Jean Chretien school of campaigning actually.

With a week and a half to go, Harper is looking strong.

Still, last time, he was looking just as strong as well. I was shocked when the liberals won a minority.

Frankly I am torn. I am sick of the liberals, but I like Paul Martin.

Sigh.

I wonder if Martin will even be able to hold onto his own seat.

I would imagine that if the Liberals lose, he will resign anyway. His life long ambition realized only for a moment. He's got to be bitter. Especially with Chretien.

Especially with Chretien... and all his suporters that are already weilding the long knives.

They seem ready to conceed defeat and are talking about leadership races and a period of rebuilding...

did anyone hear about Paul Martin's last ditch effort to buy votes? He is pledging $250,000 to families of emergency workers killed in the line of duty. He plans (or promises) if he gets in, a $25-million "hero fund". Is this desperate or what?

What's interesting about that initiative is that it was tabled by the NDP in October as a private member's bill.

The Liberals voted against it.