News Why do countries nationalize their resources?

[rocketboy]

Move out of Canada over an NDP government? What propaganda has caused you to believe an NDP government would be so horrid?

ShawnD had it partially correct. A social government like the NDP and its effects scare me.

Here is a "brief" explanation of why I could not live with an NDP government. Below are pieces of the NDP's stance on certain issues, taken directly from their website. With the quotes are my concerns.

Canadians want quality, reliable health care for everyone — not just those who can afford to buy it. That's why the NDP created public medicare in this country.

Well, they started off correct. We do want quality, reliable health care. The rest went downhill. No, sorry but public health care does NOT work. It has been believed for a long time that it would, all it needs is money. Face it, public health care is a disaster and will continue to be. People are just afraid of the alternative, private health care.

The trush is, there is a solution if people would just see it. Two-tier. If one wishes to wait in line for hours on end to find out their tumor cannot be treated for another 8 months, then they can feel free to do so. But people should not dismiss private health for those who CHOOSE it. If one can pay to have that tumor removed that day, why should they wait? Just because some people can not afford it doesn't mean those who can should not have the opportunity. Another thing, people would be putting money into health care themselves if chosen to take a private health care route, one of the biggest problems with health care (or so they say) is lack of money, this way, the money could be recirculated into teh program to keep it prime.

Why are so many people going to the USA to get "taken care of"? Because they have a private health care system...a system that people can count on. I'm not saying obliterate public health care, it is true not everyone can afford private. But not everyone can afford a Porsche, does this mean taht those who can should not have one? Give me a break.

(I would comment on education except that their site avoids the topic by blaming the liberals (which is undeniably rightfully done) but the NDP don't say what they will do...)

Every Canadian has the right to safe and decent housing. That’s why New Democrats in the 1970s created a world-recognized affordable housing program.

When the Liberals were in opposition, they criticized Conservatives for neglecting housing. But when they had a majority government, the Liberals abolished Canada’s housing program altogether.

As many as two million families now live in substandard housing. A quarter of a million have no home at all.

Last election, the Liberals said they’d build housing. But once elected, they tabled a budget with billions for corporate tax cuts they hadn’t promised — and nothing for affordable housing construction.

Ooooh this really "grinds my gears" (haha family guy). No jack, "safe and decent housing" is not a right. It's a privaledge for those who work hard enough to afford it. This may seem like a selfish, cold-hearted statement, and it probably is. But that's life, deal with it. It is not my responsibility to provide for those who do not provide for themselves. I should not pay, through my taxes or any other means, for the welfare of some crack-addict who can't support himself. Obviously there are those who do need social welfare, such as the mentally/physically disabled - people who can't help the way they are.

But I have ZERO respect for people who sit on the streat begging for money, or drug/alcohol addicts who have messed up their own lives and aren't willing to do something about it. There is nothing stopping them from getting an education, public schools ensure that. There is nothing stopping them from getting a job, except their own laziness/addiction or whatever it is. Why do we support these people who aren't willing to support themselves? They think they can just coast through life on other people's hard earned money. That is hardly just, it is criminal. Person X works his @$$ off to make money to provide for his family and the governmetn takes it to give to some addict so that he/she can buy their crack and live in govt housing. I can't stand it. In my opinion, these type of people are only hurting society, and for all I care they can live on the street, I will walk right by them as they beg for money. They can get a job and do something about it, nobody is forcing them to be poor.

Canada has the resources and expertise to help developing nations provide people with education, clean water, sustainable power and life-saving drugs.

Let's try getting Canada put together first ok?

Canada is stronger thanks to the skills and diversity new Canadians bring. With birth rates falling, immigration can help us build our 21st Century economy and keep our social programs strong.

By "keep our social programs strong" they mean "with new immagrants we will have more people to spend YOUR (the taxpayers) money on!" (joke)

Seriously, maybe we'd be stronger if the skills Canadians have didn't all go to the USA. I read somewhere that 2/3 doctor's educated in Canada go work in the USA. And they wonder why we have a shortage of doctors here...it doesn't take a genius to figure out. No, more immigrants will not build our 21st Century economy. Lower taxes and more privitization will build our 21st Century econdom. Lower taxes = more money that people have to spend = more money going back into our economy. Privatization = more money going into the programs people want adn are paying for = stronger economy. I think a pre-requisite for becoming a member of the NDP is "lack of economics 101".

Canada can invest to build the country we want — and balance the books every year doing it. We said we supported balanced budgets, and in the spring we wrote one that shows the NDP means it.

The next line should read "in order to balance the budget we're going to steal your money and give it to other countries and drug addicts."

Canada can create jobs by expanding trade and by investing in ourselves. But after 12 years of Liberal government, we’re losing high-quality manufacturing jobs — while new jobs offer less pay, less security and weaker pensions.

I covered most of this elsewhere...but I want to say that stronger pensions are just encouragement to retire early...sorry, I don't see how this helps the economy. Oh yea, I forgot to say above in the social section. If we're giving poor people money, WHAT is influencing them to support themselves? Obviously they are just going to keep on collecting their welfare because not having a job means free money. STUPID STUPID STUPID!

I'm starting to hate their website...they keep saying that things are bad with the liberals and that they need changed, but they don't say what they are going to do! Take this page for example: http://www.ndp.ca/page/2463

I have posted the link so that you can see the entire page and can't tell me I left somethign out on purpose. NOWHERE on that page do they say what they are going to do to make the situation better.

At teh top of the page they say "Canadians are proud of our peacekeeping role in the world. And when crises hit home — from forest fires to hurricanes — our military’s there when we need it."

No, we Canadians are NOT proud of our peacekeeping role in the world. Our military is a disgrace, and this is coming from somebody who plans on becoming a Canadian fighter pilot prior to going to NASA. I can't criticize the NDP here unfortunately because they refrain from saying anything.

Canadians support fair taxes when government invests responsibly in people’s priorities — such as training for young people, care for our seniors and health care for everyone.

Sorry NDP, but tax raises are not under my definition of fair taxes...in fact, I think it falls under the category of CRIMINAL.

The NDP believe (as most socialists do) that people should give the government their money for the govt to take care of them. Look, it is exactly what they are saying here! "when govt invests in responsibilities for people's priorities" YOU SEE? I believe in the opposite, small govt. The NDP is proposing "BIG" govt. The less govt the better, I want to be free.

So there you have a "brief" intro to my thoughts. I did warn you above

I always get worked up about politics, I have extremely strong views and opinions on how I think things should be, and if I let myself this post would be pages long expressing them. But the thread is about who I would vote for, and I have given my answer.

Can I say...I told you so? lol. Happy posting, I'd be very interested to hear other people's views on what I have said above. "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it." (John Locke if I remember correctly).

 

[scorpa]

I'm personally kind of disappointed with the stances all of the major parties seem to take on education...or should I say that none of them seem to make an issue of it. Maybe I was just looking in the wrong places but it didn't seem to me that any of them really appeared to address the issues of rising tuition, class sizes and all of that stuff.

 

[ek]

Paul Martin has addressed education a bit. See this article:

http://www.cbc.ca/nb/story/nb_students20050106.html

 

[rocketboy]

Come on, we all know that the liberals will not do anything about education once in power...they'll find some way to skirt around the topic, or make it appear as if they're doing something about it when they aren't. It's the Liberal way, it's in their blood, they can't help it. But we can - by making sure they lose the election.

 

[Dooga Blackrazor]

The liberals will do a lot more for education than the capitalist pigs of the conservative party.

 

[rocketboy]

Conservatives understand that education is necessary in order to produce individuals who will amount to something and become an integral part of the business world in one way or another. Education is a must for a strong economy, without future generations to take the place of other successful people in society the economy will fall.

Liberals understand issues from a different perspective. They don't see how they can make the country better, they only see how they can lie and decieve in order to maintain power. They aren't looking out for the citizens of Canada, they are only looking out for themselves. They are the pigs.

You say "the liberals will do a lot for education". Where did you get this notion? In the past, what is it, 15ish years, have the Liberals done anything to help education? The education system is in shambles, at my local high school (which I do not attend thank god) they call the gr 12 class "potential grads" because it's likely that most will fail. This isn't a special case...the Liberals have destroyed public education...along with public health care, the justice system, national defense, international relations, the economy, gun control...must I go on?

 

[scorpa]

Liberals may address it on their website, but the way I see it they have had plenty of time in power to actually do something about it and never have. Maybe instead of wasting an insane amount of money on having people register their guns among other things, that money could have been put into something that will actually see results such as education. There are way to many poor schools out there that are barely functioning for governments to not take notice. My high school actually ran out of paper halfway through the year, and its happened more than one, I don't think it will be open much longer. When I graduated it offered the bare minimum courses, I was lucky I was even able to take physics as they wanted to cancel it. Kids come out of that school, not knowing about any of the opportunities availible to them. I just don't see why none of the parties are more concerned about the state of education, you would think they would want a more educated, knowledgeable public, but I guess not.

 

[rocketboy]

Liberals may address it on their website, but the way I see it they have had plenty of time in power to actually do something about it and never have. Maybe instead of wasting an insane amount of money on having people register their guns among other things, that money could have been put into something that will actually see results such as education.

EXACTLY! They are hopeless.

 

[Dooga Blackrazor]

Conservatives understand that education is necessary in order to produce individuals who will amount to something and become an integral part of the business world in one way or another. Education is a must for a strong economy, without future generations to take the place of other successful people in society the economy will fall.

Liberals understand issues from a different perspective. They don't see how they can make the country better, they only see how they can lie and decieve in order to maintain power. They aren't looking out for the citizens of Canada, they are only looking out for themselves. They are the pigs.

You say "the liberals will do a lot for education". Where did you get this notion? In the past, what is it, 15ish years, have the Liberals done anything to help education? The education system is in shambles, at my local high school (which I do not attend thank god) they call the gr 12 class "potential grads" because it's likely that most will fail. This isn't a special case...the Liberals have destroyed public education...along with public health care, the justice system, national defense, international relations, the economy, gun control...must I go on?

I didn't say the liberals would do a lot for education. I said they would do a lot more than the conseratives. A lot more than nothing isn't very much.

The conserative solution is to privatize everything. Sure, they might let health care stay public, but it would degenerate due to conservative tax cuts. Education would be better in wealthy communities under a conservative government. The poor would have little chance of success. I am not saying the liberals do much better, but, with the NDP, they are are accomplishing things.

 

[scorpa]

You say it as though all the liberals need is a chance and they will do something for education. What's been stopping them the past few years that they have been in power from supporting education? They may say that they will do something, but I think that they have proved they will do nothing. As has been said before, we are stuck picking the best of a bad bunch, no party is even close to being good in my opinion, but I do think that we need to see change from what we have now. The liberals have had their chance to prove themselves and failed dismally, I just don't think they deserve to stay in power.

 

[Treadstone 71]

NDP. Liberals are too corrupt and a counter-example to Fermat's Last Theorem will be found before I vote for CPC.

 

[rocketboy]

Here's what I don't understand. Most people agree that change is needed, and that a Liberal govt. is out of the question due to the corruption and the lack of government when it's needed. So why do people still vote for them? Are they that afraid of a conservative govt.?

NDP. Liberals are too corrupt and a counter-example to Fermat's Last Theorem will be found before I vote for CPC.

CPC as in the communist party? A vote for the NDP is pretty close as far as Canada goes IMO.

 

[scorpa]

I was watching the news last night and apparently right now if a vote was taken conservatives would win but a minority government would be formed. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that traditionally, the conservatives biggest problems were gaining votes in the eastern areas which tend to be more supportive of the liberals. I think this time they are gaining more support in the east and might actually be able to pull it off. It's to bad that it will end up being a minority government though.

 

[rocketboy]

I was watching the news last night and apparently right now if a vote was taken conservatives would win but a minority government would be formed. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think that traditionally, the conservatives biggest problems were gaining votes in the eastern areas which tend to be more supportive of the liberals. I think this time they are gaining more support in the east and might actually be able to pull it off. It's to bad that it will end up being a minority government though.

Yes it is too bad, but it is a start! Perhaps if a conservative government is given the chance people will lose their fear of "the right wing" and they will see how much better Canada is, and in the following election we will have a majority!

I agree, the biggest difficulty is in the east, and Quebec. Also in the big cities I think the Liberals tend to traditionally win more seats.

 

[scorpa]

It's true it is a start. But with a minority government won't it be much harder to implement change? The leader of the minority government will constantly have to comprimise with the opposition, which if their views are different enough could lead to a political deadlock. Hopefully this would not happen, and the conservatives will be given a full chance at making their government work.

 

[ShawnD]

The trush is, there is a solution if people would just see it. Two-tier. If one wishes to wait in line for hours on end to find out their tumor cannot be treated for another 8 months, then they can feel free to do so. But people should not dismiss private health for those who CHOOSE it. If one can pay to have that tumor removed that day, why should they wait?

My feelings exactly. A few years ago, my mom needed surgery to remove a small piece of bone on her foot which was causing her a lot of pain when she wore shoes. She was on a waiting list for 5 months to have the surgery to remove that piece of bone. Both of my parents have excellent health insurance, so it would be more than reasonable to have this problem fixed by private health care, but there just aren't any private hospitals.

Having 2-tier health doesn't just benefit those who can afford it, it benefits those who choose to stay with the public health system. Suppose you're #10 in line for surgery. 5 people ahead of you decide they want to get the problem fixed immediately, so they go to private health care. Suddenly you're #5 in line, but you're still in the public line. Everybody wins. Who loses?

I'm personally kind of disappointed with the stances all of the major parties seem to take on education...or should I say that none of them seem to make an issue of it. Maybe I was just looking in the wrong places but it didn't seem to me that any of them really appeared to address the issues of rising tuition, class sizes and all of that stuff.

How is it an issue exactly? Canada has some of the most educated people in the world, one of the highest literacy rates, and incredibly low tuition rates. Do you know what a year of university costs in Alberta? NAIT's tuition is $3200, and the equipment there is top notch. Hundreds of computers, a few dozen gas chromatographs, a few liquid chromatographs, several mass spectrometers, and even a few atomic absorption/emission spectrometers (those cost more than $150,000 each). Class sizes are about 20 students per theory class and 10 students per lab class. I've also gone to University of Alberta with a friend and the story is about the same - 10 people per lab, 20 per theory class.

 

[ComputerGeek]

My feelings exactly. A few years ago, my mom needed surgery to remove a small piece of bone on her foot which was causing her a lot of pain when she wore shoes. She was on a waiting list for 5 months to have the surgery to remove that piece of bone. Both of my parents have excellent health insurance, so it would be more than reasonable to have this problem fixed by private health care, but there just aren't any private hospitals.
Having 2-tier health doesn't just benefit those who can afford it, it benefits those who choose to stay with the public health system. Suppose you're #10 in line for surgery. 5 people ahead of you decide they want to get the problem fixed immediately, so they go to private health care. Suddenly you're #6 in line, but you're still in the public line. Everybody wins. Who loses?
How is it an issue exactly? Canada has some of the most educated people in the world, one of the highest literacy rates, and incredibly low tuition rates. Do you know what a year of university costs in Alberta? NAIT's tuition is $3200, and the equipment there is top notch. Hundreds of computers, a few dozen gas chromatographs, a few liquid chromatographs, several mass spectrometers, and even a few atomic absorption/emission spectrometers (those cost more than $150,000 each). Class sizes are about 20 students per theory class and 10 students per lab class. I've also gone to University of Alberta with a friend and the story is about the same - 10 people per lab, 20 per theory class.

I think the best solution is single payer health. Private Point of care but the government pays (and regulates the prices)

then hospitals can get donations and such to maintain good and up to date facilities, and the people can get well baby visits, prescription coverage, and many other things.

if you want more care options (such as bariatric surgery, or no co-pays, etc) then buy some supplemental insurance.

it is similar to two-teir, but everyone gets the same speed of care (moderately fast care) like in the US now.

 

[ShawnD]

I think the best solution is single payer health. Private Point of care but the government pays (and regulates the prices)

What you suggested is how Alberta's telephone system works. The one phone company is Telus, it's privately owned, but it's government regulated. It actually works quite well.
I completely support your proposed healthcare system.

 

[ComputerGeek]

What you suggested is how Alberta's telephone system works. The one phone company is Telus, it's privately owned, but it's government regulated. It actually works quite well.
I completely support your proposed healthcare system.

That is how the phone system worked(and still works) after the ma Bell break-up in the 80's here in the US too.

now however, I fear that with SBC in control of 2/3 of the US market again, we might be seeing a return to the bad old days.

 

[Dooga Blackrazor]

Two tier health care is unacceptable. Every individual should have the best possible access to medical care. It's a fundamental human right. To give the rich better access to medical care is hiearchical and inhumane. If one person gets the best, everyone should get the best. Conservatism comprimises the poor for the benefit of the elite. The NDP wants everyone to be the elite. Though many leftist policies seem difficult to implement, they are possible to implement; therefore, we should be supporting leftist policies. If private health care becomes popular, the proletariat should burni down bourgousie property around the country.

Thankfully, I don't see private health care becoming popular in this country. If the conservatives win the election, the other parties will support very few conservative policies. Remember, the bloc aligned for political reasons - not policy reasons. They are social democrats.

 

[rocketboy]

Two tier health care is unacceptable. Every individual should have the best possible access to medical care. It's a fundamental human right. To give the rich better access to medical care is hiearchical and inhumane. If one person gets the best, everyone should get the best.

So you're saying that if somebody can afford to save their own life by going to a private center to get treated, that they shouldn't be able to because some other people don't have that ability?

Life isn't about equality man...some people work hard, and can afford better things. Just because others can't doesn't mean these hard working people should be deprived of these better things. Take a scholastic example, should somebody with a 95 average not be allowed to have marks that good because another only has an 85? No, he/she worked for those marks and deserves to have better grades than the other person. Be realistic, society is not equal, never has been, and never will be.

Conservatism comprimises the poor for the benefit of the elite.

Compromises the poor for the benefit of the elite? That is quite a negative way to put it, in fact, they don't compromise the poor at all. In the case of a two-tier health care system, they would be simply providing more options. For some, public health care will remain their option...with less lineups because those who have the private option will be out of the waiting room. They are not sacrficing the poor.

The NDP wants everyone to be the elite. Though many leftist policies seem difficult to implement, they are possible to implement; therefore, we should be supporting leftist policies.

The NDP has a sheltered idea of a utopia that is so far from real life I'm surprised anybody takes them seriously. They want everyone to be elite...well sorry but that is never going to happen. There will always be a hierarchy. Even in an "equal" society, there will be those who work harder, or are better-liked than others. These people will automatically begin to form a new type of "elite". No matter how hard you try, no matter what situation you put society in, there will be a hierarchy, there will be those who are deemed as more "elite". It may not be money declaring it, but in some way people will rise the social ladder. The only way I can think of to make an "equal" society is to remove all emotion and individuality. Perhaps if society was composed of robots there could be equality. For robots do not think for themselves, they have no feelings/emotions, do not judge one another, do not strive to be better, they simply do what they are programmed to do.

We humans are not robots.
We humans have feeling/emotion, we strive to do better, we think for ourselves, we are unique and individualistic...WE ARE NOT EQUAL.


I would LOVE to know how you plan on implementing a system where social heirarchy is removed. Go on, do your best...describe to me, any system you can conceive in order to make society "equal". I have no doubt that it is impossible to do without removing what makes us human...and you wouldn't want to do that would you? That would make you "immoral".

-jonathan

 

[scorpa]

How is it an issue exactly? Canada has some of the most educated people in the world, one of the highest literacy rates, and incredibly low tuition rates. Do you know what a year of university costs in Alberta? NAIT's tuition is $3200, and the equipment there is top notch. Hundreds of computers, a few dozen gas chromatographs, a few liquid chromatographs, several mass spectrometers, and even a few atomic absorption/emission spectrometers (those cost more than $150,000 each). Class sizes are about 20 students per theory class and 10 students per lab class. I've also gone to University of Alberta with a friend and the story is about the same - 10 people per lab, 20 per theory class.

There is a lot of truth to what you just said. $3200 is definitely not bad, but I am currently pay over $5000 which I suppose still probably isn't considered that bad, I hear it is going to be going up about 12% next year. I am in a class right now that has over 450 students in it, and in two of my classes there aren't enough seats resulting in people having to sit on the floor in the aisles. The labs are a great size about 20 people, my smallest class is 40 (english) but all of my science classes increase rapidly from the smallest of about 250 which isn't to bad. I love my university and am really not complaining about it. My beef is with the junior and senior high schools...a lot of them are dirt poor, and are facing closure because the money just isn't there. I mean my school actually couldn't afford paper...that's bad.

 

[Treadstone 71]

CPC = Conservative Party of Canada

 

[ShawnD]

My beef is with the junior and senior high schools...a lot of them are dirt poor, and are facing closure because the money just isn't there. I mean my school actually couldn't afford paper...that's bad.

Your school didn't have paper because it's not the school's responsibility. The extra paper you find in classrooms is paid for by the teachers, and it shouldn't be their responsibility either. It's the parents who are to blame if there's a lack of paper. Parents need to stop being idiots and just buy things for their kids already.
The other point is that schools are a provincial concern. Each province has a different school system, some provinces even have a different number of grades. I think it was Ontario that had 13 grades up until 3 years ago; Alberta has 12 grades. Are they different because of the federal government? No, they're different because schooling is under provincial control.

 

[rocketboy]

Anybody watch the leader's debate?

What did you think?

 

[revelator]

Here in my riding, and the neighboring ones as well, I see the most support (judging by lawn signs only) for Liberals , followed closely by the Conservatives . There's a few NDP, and even 1 or 2 Christian Heritage Party . Most of the talking heads I've been listening to are saying that a lot of the Toronto and surrounding ridings are going to go Liberal. Seems we have a leftist stronghold down here. I figure this is a result of Mike Harris and his Common Sense Revolution. It's his legacy that's screwed Conservative politicians in Ontario.
Also, for what it's worth, I've noticed in my riding (Mississauga-East) both the Liberals and Conservatives seems to be having a problem with having their signs defaced.

If the conservatives win the election, the other parties will support very few conservative policies. Remember, the bloc aligned for political reasons - not policy reasons. They are social democrats.

This is pretty much why I'm not worried about a Conservative win. They'll be impotent, considering the opposition is all left-leaning. Attempts at privatizing health care will be quashed easily, their attempt at turning around gay marriage laws will be quashed. Unless voters give the Conservatives a majority, they will be weaker than any of the other parties in a minority situation. They will likely be the shortest lived of any of the minority governments that could arise from the election.

 

[ShawnD]

They will likely be the shortest lived of any of the minority governments that could arise from the election.

Governments sometimes do get reelected you know.

 

[revelator]

Indeed they do. But if they ever hope to have a majority, they'll need to figure out a way to make themselves attractive to voters in Southern Ontario and Quebec.

 

[ek]

Scathing Liberal ads on tv tonight. Really tore Harper a new one.

I personally liked the "George Bush's best friend" one.

Good ads. Hopefully they turn the tide.

 

[revelator]

Gah, I'm reading the papers and the polls are showing a good lead for the Conservatives , with them gaining ground in Southern Ontario and Quebec!

In the last election, that ended up working against the Conservatives.