HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Politics


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2010, 2:38 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,280
If people are really concerned about the NDP being anti-business, they should be rooting for Carole James to stay at the helm. She's been trying to build those bridges, as Blair did in the UK. Why do you think she's getting so much flak from within her own party? She's not the most charismatic person, but then a lot of people have tired of Gordo's used car salesman hucksterism style of leadership (The Best Place on Earth, anyone?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2010, 2:54 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
If people are really concerned about the NDP being anti-business, they should be rooting for Carole James to stay at the helm.
Everyone that I know states that Carole James comes across as a flake. Mike Harcourt did the exact same that you espouse James is doing now during the late 1980's/early 1990's - "reaching out to business". And I like Mike and I would categorize him as a federal Liberal. But it's all just window dressing.

The problem is that once the NDP came to power in 1991 they ejected their supposedly pro-business stance and the "left" within the party/government asserted control. Don't you remember Glen Clark, then BC finance minister, wanting to place a capital gains tax on all homes above $500,000 in the City of Vancouver and the massive outcry? Or Clark's huge tax increases on capital and investment and his political dogma/war against business?

What you don't seem to understand is that the BC New Democrats are infested with left-wing ideologues unlike their Manitoba and Saskatchewan counterparts which ARE business-friendly and their policies are anathma to the BC NDP.

And frankly, I don't want to experience another social experiment as I witnessed during the 1990's - "The Lost Decade" as StatsCan once described BC.

BTW, Cariboo NDP MLA Bob Simpson was a former provincial Liberal who sought a provincial Liberal nomination in 1996 under Gordo. James turfed recently him out of caucus and since Simpson is on the right-side of the NDP, that move also sends the wrong signal to political centrists and is certainly not a "Blairite" move.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Nov 5, 2010, 5:57 PM
usog usog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 580
http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...early-election

Hahahahahahaha. I wonder how that would end up. It's more like she wants an early election before she fks up and sinks her party again in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 1:31 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Really? That will come as news to the British Columbians who built the entire BC Ferries fleet up to the misguided Campbell years. Of course, in keeping with the typical anti-NDP hysteria, some like to focus solely on the fast ferries.
The current BC Ferries fleet is 36 ships. That's not an industry.

We have 3 metro lines, does that mean Vancouver has a booming subway building industry? Heck, our trains even come from Korea and Mexico.

It's not an industry when the only buyer is the local government. What if we just didn't need ferries? (many people DID say we didn't need the Coastal ships at all). There are gaps when we don't need ferries built, what happens to government supported companies then (build ferries for no reason?). If the companies can't support themselves on private contracts, then it's not an industry, it's a public sector bureaucracy.

Like I said, the "industry" we do have isn't based on building large ships, it's a refit and repair industry. The province has used them in the past to build ferries, but that's not the reason those companies are supposed to be in business. Their only client isn't supposed to be the provincial government.

Burrard (Burrard-Yarrows) Dry Docks went out of business in the 90's (they built some ferries, both as Burrard and Yarrow, but were never as large as when they built ships during WWII). Blame the NDP?

Victoria Machinery Depot went out of business in 1994. And that is completely the fault of the NDP as many point to it being one of the major successful BC companies that was victim of the business contractions of the 90's under their leadership.

Washington Marine Group (owners of Vancouver Ship Yards) is still going strong, thanks to their many contracts to refit and repair BC ferries, and owns most of the facilities that were owned by the defunct companies. Allied Shipbuilders is still around too. Allied just finished a refit a newly purchased ferry, and Washington Marine Group refit many of the C-class ships (at around $35 million a pop) under the Liberals.

And the Coastal ships ARE NOT the first foreign purchases by BC Ferries.

The ill fated Queen of the North was built in Germany and bought from Sweden in 1974.... BY THE NDP!!!!!!

And many of the old CPR and Blackball ferries that BC Ferries assumed control over were built all over the world.

And why NOT focus on the fast ferries? They were the ONLY ferries the NDP built over 10 years in power. And they were colossal failures in every way imaginable! The Spirit ships were put in motion by the Socreds, and the NDP completed construction already set in motion, but the Fast Cats were the only ferries conceived and built by the NDP.

They mismanaged ever single aspect of the project. They used public funds to start up a crown corporation (Catamaran Ferries International). This crown corporation's goal was to sell these ferries, at a loss, to create an industry of happy voters.

First they didn't consider the impact or practical application of Highspeed ferries on the coastal routes. They operate in sensitive areas and can't achieve high speed. They had half the capacity of a standard ferry, and took as long to unload and load as the ferries with twice as many cars. These conditions (slow near port, half the capacity) meant that using the fast cats meant BC ferries couldn't transport as many cars across as they used to in a day. They were also fuel inefficient, broke down constantly, and vibrated like a nanny shaking a baby.

Secondly, none of what they did would work anywhere else in the world. The whole point of spending hundreds of millions on setting this project up was to start an industry to sell these things. But they designed ferries that wouldn't work in any other waterway in the world.

The NDP were warned numerous times. First, BC Ferries management wanted to lease a fast ferry and conduct sea trials, to see how fast ferries operated in coastal waters. An Australian company offered their expertize to the project, they warned that first time builders won't be on time because of the materials, warned the engines (we were planning on getting) sucked, and that maintenance costs would be higher than expected. The NDP ignored all suggestions and went straight to building.

Even if there weren't cost overruns, the ships were still poorly designed and unwanted by potential buyers. Even if the targeted cost of $70million per vessel was achieved, we couldn't sell them for half of that. It was a huge waste of money, that many people on the inside warned the NDP about, for an ill conceived plan of setting up an international ferry building company.

It was like that episode of the Simpsons where Homer designs a car. EXACTLY like that. The design was retarded, cost the company more than expected, and nobody wanted one. The 3 things you don't do when running a business.

Say what you will about the design of the Canada line, but on a single day during the Olympics, the Canada Line carried more people than the Fast Cat Fleet combined carried in their operating career.

Sure, the fastferries might not really have cost that much compared to other things we spend money on, but this was one of the few things they had complete control over, from creation to completion, and they mismanaged the hell out of it. It showed that the party had absolutely no leadership or business capabilities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 2:02 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by usog View Post
http://www.news1130.com/news/local/a...early-election

Hahahahahahaha. I wonder how that would end up. It's more like she wants an early election before she fks up and sinks her party again in my opinion.
Or before they replace her as leader too. If people respond to whoever the new Liberal Leader is, expect her to be gone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 7:27 AM
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
The commodity bust took us to the so-called "have-not" status. Anyone notice that ON is now a have-not? Its a totally artificial creation, used as a bogeyman by various political parties at various times.

And anyone who thinks Gordo's destruction of our shipbuilding, forest products and other union-friendly industries were done in the name of "efficiency" rather than pure political pandering to his Socred-Retread party's corporate masters needs their head examined. But I guess massive subsidies to the tourism industry in the form of the 2010 Olympics, or tax breaks for film production is "efficient" too?
Ahhh so it was just the commodities bust that ruined BC's economy all through the 90's and it had nothing to do with the NDP's tax-and-spend ideology? So how do you explain nearby jurisdictions like Washington, Alberta, Oregon and Saskatchewan all flourishing in the 90's, while BC slumped? I guess they don't have any commodities huh?

Also, there is nothing "artificial" about being a have-not province. You either give more than you take from Ottawa or vice versa and the NDP took BC to have-not status for the first time in it's history. But it was all just the commodities bust, right?

As far as "destroying" BC's shipbuilding industry, as others have pointed out, BC didn't really have one in spite of the NDP's utopian ideas of building one and that obviously didn't work out too well so the Liberals haven't "destroyed" anything.

As for the Olympics, just look at Calgary since 1988 because i'd say that city has done pretty well so I highly doubt hosting the Olympics will hurt Vancouver one bit even though the taxation is unfair to everyone in the province that doesn't live in the lower mainland.

I'll let you in on a secret too-unions are stubborn, inefficient and wasteful and they cost the taxpayer exorbitant amounts of money (how you don't know this is amazing!) so any premier that says he wants to encourage the private sector over the big unions has my vote.

Let's see if i've got this straight, you are not in favour of tax breaks to try and stimulate the economy?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 9:12 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Ahhh so it was just the commodities bust that ruined BC's economy all through the 90's and it had nothing to do with the NDP's tax-and-spend ideology? So how do you explain nearby jurisdictions like Washington, Alberta, Oregon and Saskatchewan all flourishing in the 90's, while BC slumped? I guess they don't have any commodities huh?

Also, there is nothing "artificial" about being a have-not province. You either give more than you take from Ottawa or vice versa and the NDP took BC to have-not status for the first time in it's history. But it was all just the commodities bust, right?

As far as "destroying" BC's shipbuilding industry, as others have pointed out, BC didn't really have one in spite of the NDP's utopian ideas of building one and that obviously didn't work out too well so the Liberals haven't "destroyed" anything.

As for the Olympics, just look at Calgary since 1988 because i'd say that city has done pretty well so I highly doubt hosting the Olympics will hurt Vancouver one bit even though the taxation is unfair to everyone in the province that doesn't live in the lower mainland.

I'll let you in on a secret too-unions are stubborn, inefficient and wasteful and they cost the taxpayer exorbitant amounts of money (how you don't know this is amazing!) so any premier that says he wants to encourage the private sector over the big unions has my vote.

Let's see if i've got this straight, you are not in favour of tax breaks to try and stimulate the economy?
Unions are stubborn and businesses are stubborn whats new. You give me an organization that is not stubborn and I'll show you a pig that is flying.

Funny how it was your private sector that put the economy into the situation that is today in the world. If there is one thing the private sector is good for is greed.

To many tax breaks can hurt the government. If they have no funds they can't provide the services they need to. Eventually we get to the point where user fees kick in. Which only benefits the rich and not the poor.

Either way I have one question to ask everyone on here

Is Campbell's ass clean, because a lot of you sure do love kissing it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 4:31 PM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,845
Wheeeeeeeewwww, I wish (in a way) I had been in Vancouver when all of this was going on, just to witness it.

The Sheiss is really starting to fly over Campell's resignation, and what the NDP and / or Liberals did and didn't do, and what they should have or shouldn't have done!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 4:38 PM
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
Unions are stubborn and businesses are stubborn whats new. You give me an organization that is not stubborn and I'll show you a pig that is flying.

Funny how it was your private sector that put the economy into the situation that is today in the world. If there is one thing the private sector is good for is greed.
No it isn't. What the private sector is very good at is providing opportunities for people through the profit motive. By making a profit, companies can then expand and grow (concepts usually lost on people like you) thus creating more jobs, more profits and more opportunities. The less hindrance government creates in this regard by high, onerous taxes, the more the private sector can grow and expand. Just look at places that have very low tax rates like Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai for proof of this. I'm not saying those places are perfect, but they are remarkably prosperous. Campbell made his share of mistakes but he at least seemed to understand this which is a big part of the reason the province was very prosperous during his reign. What's more, it was hardly the private sector's fault that many people in the US hyperextended themselves financially by getting mortgages they couldn't afford which resulted in the economic slump we are in. Also, private companies are a lot less stubborn than unions. Companies that are stubborn don't last long because there are always competing companies out there that will take their place by being more dynamic. In unions, dynamism is not something encouraged or sought. Here's an example; the teacher's union still insists on taking summer's off even though very few kids or teachers work on farms which was the whole reason they started doing that in the first place. In the private sector, I can guarantee you that that rule would have been eradicated a long time ago because competition would have forced them to change it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
To many tax breaks can hurt the government. If they have no funds they can't provide the services they need to. Eventually we get to the point where user fees kick in. Which only benefits the rich and not the poor.
Firstly, who said anything about government not getting any funds? Not me. Of course government needs taxes. Where we part company is the level of taxation. I prefer low taxes and small government. You (like many people these days, sadly) seem to think that the benevolent hand of government can fix all problems. I think the opposite though-government is often the problem rather than the solution. Having said that, I know we need some government. Taking greater responsibility for one's self through user fees only benefits the rich and not the poor? Using your logic only rich people need to take responsibility for themselves, poor people have no such requirement because whether you know it or not, that's what you're saying. User fees encourage people to take responsibility for themselves by making them pay for some of the costs of things which results in less abuse of the system and it relieves some of the tax burden.

Now that high school economics class is over, perhaps we can get back to the topic of Gordo's resignation.

Last edited by Phil McAvity; Nov 6, 2010 at 5:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 4:49 PM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Ahhh so it was just the commodities bust that ruined BC's economy all through the 90's and it had nothing to do with the NDP's tax-and-spend ideology? So how do you explain nearby jurisdictions like Washington, Alberta, Oregon and Saskatchewan all flourishing in the 90's, while BC slumped? I guess they don't have any commodities huh?

Also, there is nothing "artificial" about being a have-not province. You either give more than you take from Ottawa or vice versa and the NDP took BC to have-not status for the first time in it's history. But it was all just the commodities bust, right?

As far as "destroying" BC's shipbuilding industry, as others have pointed out, BC didn't really have one in spite of the NDP's utopian ideas of building one and that obviously didn't work out too well so the Liberals haven't "destroyed" anything.

As for the Olympics, just look at Calgary since 1988 because i'd say that city has done pretty well so I highly doubt hosting the Olympics will hurt Vancouver one bit even though the taxation is unfair to everyone in the province that doesn't live in the lower mainland.

I'll let you in on a secret too-unions are stubborn, inefficient and wasteful and they cost the taxpayer exorbitant amounts of money (how you don't know this is amazing!) so any premier that says he wants to encourage the private sector over the big unions has my vote.

Let's see if i've got this straight, you are not in favour of tax breaks to try and stimulate the economy?
LOL, so much misinformation where to begin?

If you think the Olympics were such a boon to Calgary, you might want to research Don Getty's term as premier of Alberta.

And I love the mantra of Gordo the tax-cutter. That's the same Gordo of the Carbon Tax, HST, and ever-increasing MSP premiums, right? Almost as good as the myth of Gordo as prudent fiscal manager. Might want to check out the steady climb of BC's debt (double the 2006 level), despite chicanery like making BC Ferries a "private company" etc. I won't even go into the human costs of the Lib's mismanagement. Suffice to say there's a great cover story in this week's Courier about moving drug addicts etc into seniors housing.

As to the tax cuts, the latest round of income tax cuts was the worst kind of public policy, written on the back of a napkin by a desperate government. Ever stop and think of how the Evergreen Line and other transit improvements talked about on this board are going to be paid for?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 5:19 PM
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
LOL, so much misinformation where to begin?

If you think the Olympics were such a boon to Calgary, you might want to research Don Getty's term as premier of Alberta.
Asking me to research something to prove your point proves nothing. My belief that Calgary benefitted from hosting the 1988 Winter Olympics is based on every single person i've spoken to who lives/lived there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
And I love the mantra of Gordo the tax-cutter. That's the same Gordo of the Carbon Tax, HST, and ever-increasing MSP premiums, right?
I agree with you on that, the longer he was in office the more he relied on taxes to solve problems which was exactly the opposite of the Gordo I voted for in 2001.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Almost as good as the myth of Gordo as prudent fiscal manager.
There's nothing mythical about it. Campbell is ranked the best fiscal manager of all premiers in Canada. Here's his record on fiscal management courtesy of wikipedia: 430,000 new jobs have been created in B.C. since December 2001, the best job creation record in Canada. In 2007, the economy created 70,800 more jobs, almost all full time positions. By Spring 2007, unemployment had fallen to 4.0%, the lowest rate in 30 years."

Last edited by Phil McAvity; Nov 6, 2010 at 6:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 5:34 PM
Stingray2004's Avatar
Stingray2004 Stingray2004 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: White Rock, BC (Metro Vancouver)
Posts: 3,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Might want to check out the steady climb of BC's debt (double the 2006 level)
Huh? The key indicator:

BC Taxpayer-Supported Debt: $27.175 billion
(ending March 31, 2006)

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/ocg/pa/05_06/PA_2006_Debt.pdf

BC Taxpayer-Supported Debt: $30.021 billion
(ending March 31, 2010)

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/pa/09_1...0_ProvDebt.pdf

In terms of percentage of GDP, the 2nd lowest in Canada after Alberta and that's why BC has the highest credit rating levels with Moody's, DBRS, and S & P alongside Alberta and the Government of Canada.

Certainly nothing to sneeze at.

As for the carbon tax, I agree with you. But... and that's a BIG but, at the 2007 NDP provincial convention delegates unanimously supported a carbon tax. Yes, that one.

But when the Libs later brought it in the NDP opportunistically opposed same in order to get votes. It wanted to be seen as the anti-tax party. Too funny. Anti-tax parties are always on the right side of the political spectrum.

And as for the HST, the second lowest in Canada, good old Jack Layton and the federal NDP opposed the GST portion rate reduction from 7% to 5% in 2008, which is standard NDP policy. With the federal NDP position, BC would be facing a 14% HST, not a 12 % HST.

And of course the provincial NDP government in Nova Scotia raised their HST by 2% to 15%, the highest in Canada.

You're a bit of a paradox, whatnext. You oppose the carbon tax and HST and support the NDP, yet NDP policies called for the carbon tax and a higher HST rate. I just do get ya.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 6:07 PM
RosstheBoss RosstheBoss is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 65
I'm sure people have commented on this but go Dianne Watts go!!!!! I truly believe that she is our common sense solution to leading this province, she has vision and common sense, these things don't usually come together for leaders in this province. With her at the helm I really believe we will finally see some real and common sense infrastructure solutions south of the Fraser as well as around Metro Vancouver and more importantly around the whole of BC. She would be a premier that in my opinion the whole of BC could respect, the left the right, urban and rural voter alike. She is smart and savvy and I believe would she would be able to solve many problems in areas such as our unbalanced tax system, homelessness, and maybe sort out the health care mess that has in my opinion only gotten worse under Kevin Falcon. I think that she should push Metro Vancouver municipalities to amalgamate such things as police forces, school districts, and combine the two health districts in metro Vancouver to one to cut down on bureaucracy and increase productivity. Lastly I believe that she will be and excellent voice for not just Metro Vancouver but for all of BC both within Canada and abroad, bringing in much needed trade agreements for our commodities as well as our increasing demand for BC's advanced technologies sectors.


In conclusion to this Saturday morning rant, GO WATTS GO!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Nov 6, 2010, 10:57 PM
touraccuracy's Avatar
touraccuracy touraccuracy is offline
Registered Loser
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,855
If you are complaining about paying more money under the Liberals (HST, carbon tax, higher premiums, more user fees) I guarantee it will be less than under the NDP. They're going to keep all of those and then raise taxes back up. I will bet $100 to a charity of the forum's choice that the NDP won't repeal the HST. They already started the lies in order to cover their asses when they get a crack at leading the province: they claimed that Campbell locked us in and that we'd have to pay tons of money back if we cancelled the HST... yeah... the 1.6 bill we got for instituting it (pro-rated)... which only makes sense that we'd have to give it back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPhil View Post
The current BC Ferries fleet is 36 ships. That's not an industry.

We have 3 metro lines, does that mean Vancouver has a booming subway building industry? Heck, our trains even come from Korea and Mexico.

It's not an industry when the only buyer is the local government. What if we just didn't need ferries? (many people DID say we didn't need the Coastal ships at all). There are gaps when we don't need ferries built, what happens to government supported companies then (build ferries for no reason?). If the companies can't support themselves on private contracts, then it's not an industry, it's a public sector bureaucracy.

Like I said, the "industry" we do have isn't based on building large ships, it's a refit and repair industry. The province has used them in the past to build ferries, but that's not the reason those companies are supposed to be in business. Their only client isn't supposed to be the provincial government.

Burrard (Burrard-Yarrows) Dry Docks went out of business in the 90's (they built some ferries, both as Burrard and Yarrow, but were never as large as when they built ships during WWII). Blame the NDP?

Victoria Machinery Depot went out of business in 1994. And that is completely the fault of the NDP as many point to it being one of the major successful BC companies that was victim of the business contractions of the 90's under their leadership.

Washington Marine Group (owners of Vancouver Ship Yards) is still going strong, thanks to their many contracts to refit and repair BC ferries, and owns most of the facilities that were owned by the defunct companies. Allied Shipbuilders is still around too. Allied just finished a refit a newly purchased ferry, and Washington Marine Group refit many of the C-class ships (at around $35 million a pop) under the Liberals.

And the Coastal ships ARE NOT the first foreign purchases by BC Ferries.

The ill fated Queen of the North was built in Germany and bought from Sweden in 1974.... BY THE NDP!!!!!!

And many of the old CPR and Blackball ferries that BC Ferries assumed control over were built all over the world.

And why NOT focus on the fast ferries? They were the ONLY ferries the NDP built over 10 years in power. And they were colossal failures in every way imaginable! The Spirit ships were put in motion by the Socreds, and the NDP completed construction already set in motion, but the Fast Cats were the only ferries conceived and built by the NDP.

They mismanaged ever single aspect of the project. They used public funds to start up a crown corporation (Catamaran Ferries International). This crown corporation's goal was to sell these ferries, at a loss, to create an industry of happy voters.

First they didn't consider the impact or practical application of Highspeed ferries on the coastal routes. They operate in sensitive areas and can't achieve high speed. They had half the capacity of a standard ferry, and took as long to unload and load as the ferries with twice as many cars. These conditions (slow near port, half the capacity) meant that using the fast cats meant BC ferries couldn't transport as many cars across as they used to in a day. They were also fuel inefficient, broke down constantly, and vibrated like a nanny shaking a baby.

Secondly, none of what they did would work anywhere else in the world. The whole point of spending hundreds of millions on setting this project up was to start an industry to sell these things. But they designed ferries that wouldn't work in any other waterway in the world.

The NDP were warned numerous times. First, BC Ferries management wanted to lease a fast ferry and conduct sea trials, to see how fast ferries operated in coastal waters. An Australian company offered their expertize to the project, they warned that first time builders won't be on time because of the materials, warned the engines (we were planning on getting) sucked, and that maintenance costs would be higher than expected. The NDP ignored all suggestions and went straight to building.

Even if there weren't cost overruns, the ships were still poorly designed and unwanted by potential buyers. Even if the targeted cost of $70million per vessel was achieved, we couldn't sell them for half of that. It was a huge waste of money, that many people on the inside warned the NDP about, for an ill conceived plan of setting up an international ferry building company.

It was like that episode of the Simpsons where Homer designs a car. EXACTLY like that. The design was retarded, cost the company more than expected, and nobody wanted one. The 3 things you don't do when running a business.

Say what you will about the design of the Canada line, but on a single day during the Olympics, the Canada Line carried more people than the Fast Cat Fleet combined carried in their operating career.

Sure, the fastferries might not really have cost that much compared to other things we spend money on, but this was one of the few things they had complete control over, from creation to completion, and they mismanaged the hell out of it. It showed that the party had absolutely no leadership or business capabilities.
This. This is excellent.


Everyone should read Barbarians in the Garden City by Mark Milke. I realize he's a super right wing anti-socialism freak, but a lot of the stuff in the book is irrefutable and a nice reminder of how lucky we've been in the past decade.
__________________
"The modern metropolis is a teeming hive of strung-out dope heads, rapists, home invaders and fine regional cuisine." -Cracked.com
Don't quote me on that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 3:26 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
No it isn't. What the private sector is very good at is providing opportunities for people through the profit motive. By making a profit, companies can then expand and grow (concepts usually lost on people like you) thus creating more jobs, more profits and more opportunities.
Isn't it a bit pompous on your part that just because someone doesn't agree with you that they don't understand your concept. I understand your concept I just don't agree with it.

Quote:
Firstly, who said anything about government not getting any funds? Not me. Of course government needs taxes. Where we part company is the level of taxation. I prefer low taxes and small government. You (like many people these days, sadly) seem to think that the benevolent hand of government can fix all problems. I think the opposite though-government is often the problem rather than the solution. Having said that, I know we need some government. Taking greater responsibility for one's self through user fees only benefits the rich and not the poor? Using your logic only rich people need to take responsibility for themselves, poor people have no such requirement because whether you know it or not, that's what you're saying. User fees encourage people to take responsibility for themselves by making them pay for some of the costs of things which results in less abuse of the system and it relieves some of the tax burden.
User fee benefit the rich over the poor for the simple reason that the rich will always have a greater choice. That isn't to say the poor don't have a choice, but the amount of choices they have can and usually are limited by the amount of money they have.

If you had two kids one from a rich family the other from a poor family. In terms of education the rich kid will more than likely get a better education than the poor kid. The poor kid due to having a lower education will have a greater chance of living a life of poverty. This is just one example where user fees or the idea behind them benefit the rich over the poor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 3:37 AM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,523
And what's the government to do about that? Ensure everyone gets a less than stellar education, so it's fair?

I don't know if you've noticed, but never in history has anyone lived a life worth living under socialism.

It does not, and can not, work any other way. Which is why it always inevitably fails, and those still living under it are considered the third World.

There is no chance for *anyone* to succeed, but at least we all fail together, dependant on the government

In life, there are winners and losers in everything. Regardless of the "If you had fun, you won!" indoctrination of the last 15 years.
__________________
Visit me on Flickr! Really! I'm lonely.
http://www.flickr.com/syume
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 3:43 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 22,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yume-sama View Post
And what's the government to do about that? Ensure everyone gets a less than stellar education, so it's fair?

I don't know if you've noticed, but never in history has anyone lived a life worth living under socialism...
Huh? The standard of living in Scandinavian countries always rates very highly despite those durned socialists (and bicyclists )
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 3:47 AM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,523
They certainly do some things right, though I wouldn't hold them up as the classic example of socialism. They do some things that wouldn't even fly here, with the NDP socialists. Like, forcing the unemployed to work a government job (cleaning government parks, buildings, etc.) to receive any benefits, to make them less of a "useless eater". It helps keep their unemployment numbers artificially low. And the streets of Copenhagen clean.

Nearly 35% of people in Scandinavia are employed by the state, compared to the low double digits in most other places, where people can flourish on their own.

I don't think a top-end 63% income tax + 14% duty + 25% VAT on purchases would fly here.

People lost their head over a HST

So yes, they may be living well (in their own mind), but almost none are living great.

The idea of being like Europe is a lot less romantic when you study their history, and understand why we all fled over here to begin with

Anybody you know of European descent ended up here because their ancestors ran away from... *drum roll*... socialism and its side effects.

Next week in class we can tackle why so many Chinese people fled communism to make Vancouver their home

Despite Mao being the last three letters in LMAO not too many people were having a great time.
__________________
Visit me on Flickr! Really! I'm lonely.
http://www.flickr.com/syume

Last edited by Yume-sama; Nov 7, 2010 at 4:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 5:29 AM
Millennium2002 Millennium2002 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,742
yume-sama, are you sure that everyone ran over here from Europe because of socialism? That just doesn't make a lot of sense to me... I recall many more cases of people coming because of religious persecutions, new opportunities, etc. but nothing about just opposing socialism in general, which btw I don't think existed until the 1900s and which has changed quite dramatically since then.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Nov 7, 2010, 5:36 AM
mezzanine's Avatar
mezzanine mezzanine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Huh? The standard of living in Scandinavian countries always rates very highly despite those durned socialists (and bicyclists )
And an HST-like Value-Addded Tax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
User fee benefit the rich over the poor for the simple reason that the rich will always have a greater choice. That isn't to say the poor don't have a choice, but the amount of choices they have can and usually are limited by the amount of money they have.
But you can't say that user fees are 100% bad. If that is the case, then you would disagree with road tolling as an instrument of public policy that moderates road demand and provides road funding more from users. Tolling is super-regressive as AFAIK, no jurisdiction provides means-testing for tolls.

User fees with means testing seems fair to me. if jimmy Patterson could collect old-age pension and the GIS, that would make no sense to me. Means-tested pharmacare and MSP premiums along those lines also seem fair. You can always adjust the premium cut-offs if you are worried about impacts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cabotp View Post
If you had two kids one from a rich family the other from a poor family. In terms of education the rich kid will more than likely get a better education than the poor kid. The poor kid due to having a lower education will have a greater chance of living a life of poverty. This is just one example where user fees or the idea behind them benefit the rich over the poor.
Many factors influence getting post-secondary. Being the children of immigrants increases your chances of getting post-secondary. Being female increases your chances of getting to university. Certainly the milleu of being poor decreases your chances. But in your example, if we lower tuition rates you just gave a subsidy to the rich kids who are more likely to get to post-secondary due to a whole bunch of other factors. A systme of higher tuitions but a means-testing for bursaries, aid and loans IMO is the better way.

Last edited by mezzanine; Nov 7, 2010 at 6:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Politics
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:23 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.