Hey British Columbians Of Voting Age

[Munk]

Anything from something we can atleast assume is neutral? Statscan maybe?

[Bizud]

Right, right, BCStats and Statscan are working for the NDP.

 

Here's more.  This source obviously is biased, but that doesn't make it false:

 

http://www.nupge.ca/news_2004/n08de04a.htm

 

Here, from the same website, but referring to a report from the (admittedly left-leaning, but respected) Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives:

 

http://www.nupge.ca/news_2004/n14jn04c.htm

You seem to be missing information though such as how the budget has been balanced twice under generally accepted accounting principles (the same ones many accountants use), as well as how they payed off some of the debt.

I don't dispute that it's been balanced at least once (twice, though, I'd like to see record of). My point is that everyone comes in here and slags the NDPs record because they've heard on tv how bad the NDP were, when in the 90's BC experienced good economic growth (4th in the province; last three years we've been 5th, if you're keeping score) and record job creation, despite being hit badly by the recession in east Asia. Unemployment stayed constant, but that's only because we also experienced record population growth, the highest in Canada (Liberal supporters will tell you we experienced a net migration deficit, but that's because they only count migration within Canada - more Canadians in BC did go to Alberta, yes, but even more people came to BC from outside the country). Liberals are quick to tell you the NDP were so bad that we became a "have-not" province, qualifying for equalization payments, but they don't tell you the equalization formula is a curve, and Alberta's economy was growing so fast that the curve changed radically; BC's economy was growing throughout the period. Liberals are quick to tell you the NDP always run deficits, but they don't tell you the NDP inherited a massive deficit from the SoCreds, and slowly, with minimal cuts (because services are more important than numbers on paper), balanced the budget, in keeping with the NDP's record as the best budget-balancers of all Canadian parties - despite the Chretien (Martin) Liberals cutting transfer payments to the provinces.

 

It's a load of crap, basically.

[Matt]

Actually they did not balance the budget twice in a row, the B.C. Liberals did. B.C. was lowest in job creation under the N.D.P., and now more people are working than before. We have to create an economy to help people to gain job experience, and to generate an income. Under the N.D.P. our economy suffered, it was poorly managed, remember fast cat ferries? There were several projects like that. The Liberals have a plan, and we have seen the beginning of it. The N.D.P. is quick to slag the Liberals so it is not like they are innocent.

Edited April 15, 2005 by Matt

[Bizud]

Go away, MAtt.

[Munk]

Don't tell him to go away, he's getting me those numbers. >:C

 

edit: Because other than voteliberal<3.com, he hasn't given us a damn thing to work with.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Jaded Monkey

[Bizud]

The moral of the story is, we're much better off under the NDP - which is one reason the province's population increased so much - than under the Liberals. Carole James' NDP might not be the same as Mike Harcourt's or Dave Barrett's, but if they're elected they'll elminate the $6.00/hour training wage, freeze tuition, hire more teachers, restore affordable services, and do it all with balanced budgets, healthy economic growth, and CanWest Global telling us we have neither. Given another four (or eight) years in office, the Liberals will keep the new minimum wage for trainees, tuition fees will continue to rise, public ownership will be replaced by private ownership, you get the picture. The BC Liberal philosophy is less government in the economy, more power to business, less power to labour, user-pay. That's not how I want this province run.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Bizud

[Trayas]

I myself, having reached voting age in B.C. lately, am not voting Liberals for one reason. They are hurting teachers in our province. I myself am planning to become a teacher myself, not right now but soon, and plan not to put in a goverment which would hurt my future career.

[Munk]

They treated the nurses in BC when they striked about as well.

[Crusader]

I'm really hoping noone votes for Green this time, I know they have their good points but splitting the vote between the NDP and the Green party will only result in a win for the Liberals (again).

[Bizud]

I myself am planning to become a teacher

 

Word.

 

I'm really hoping noone votes for Green this time, I know they have their good points but splitting the vote between the NDP and the Green party will only result in a win for the Liberals (again).

 

Pretty much. Worth noting is that Adriane Carr (Green leader) will be appearing in the leaders' debate, but Democratic Reform BC leader Tom Morino will not, even though DRBC have one member in the Legislature and the Greens have none. Hmmm, wonder why this is, could it be because the corporate media is all too happy to encourage vote-splitting on the left, but not the centre or centre-right? Fuck you Global.

[Matt]

The N.D.P. have made the same promises before, all while "balancing the budget". They have proven how trustworthy they are. They overspent each year except in two years of all their terms. Also how is the government truly hurting teachers? With a tuition freeze there will be less money to give them a raise with. Under the N.D.P. they did no more than the Liberals did, but everyone seems to want to hate the current government, the same mentality happened to the N.D.P. during the 2000 election, and transfered to the Liberals now. The N.D.P. did not increase space for my students to take health care courses in schools. The teachers had some of their demands met under the N.D.P. but often it meant they were on strike a few months later for more until Ujjal Dosangh finally legislated them back to work. However, even with all those strikes they had about the same deal as they do now. The so called moral you delivered is nothing more than you have run out of points symbolized in two words, "Go away". What's the problem? Cat got your tounge? Really Bizud, you even said good bye after I stated the N.D.P. is guilty of the same things you accuse the Liberals of.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Matt

[Bizud]

Let's go through this piece by piece.

 

First, the deficit. Running a deficit, while generally something to be avoided, is not the end of the world. It doesn't always mean "overspending." It means more money will have to be spent paying it off in the following years, but it's a good way to avoid having to slash services while waiting for the economy to grow enough to return to a balanced budget. The NDP inherited a massive deficit from the SoCreds. In the '91 election, the Liberals ran on a platform of eliminating the deficit right away by whatever means necessary; the NDP ran, and were elected on, a platform of reducing the deficit slowly over time, without cutting important services or introducing austerity measures (such as Bob Rae's "Rae days"). They did this, and the deficit was eventually paid off. Promise delivered.

 

Tuition:

 

Also how is the government truly hurting teachers? With a tuition freeze there will be less money to give them a raise with.

 

That doesn't make any sense, the money can come from other places besides elsewhere in the education system. When we talk about teachers, we're generally referring to high school teachers, so tuition doesn't have anything to do with it. You're correct, the NDP did not give the teachers all that they wanted. I have mixed feelings on this, but that was part of balancing the budget, and you'd have been the first to complain if they'd have even one more deficit because they gave the teachers what they wanted. The Liberals certainly won't be any better, though.

 

Post-secondary: Should tuition fees be raised? Answer, no, they should not, unless they are accompanied by other efforts making it easier for people to pay for school (like, student grants accompanying student loans...but the Liberals cut those). It's not enough to just say "need more money, ergo fees should raise." There's a question of principle here: In principle, who should be paying for something like education? All of us, in the form of taxes, or the people who use it, in the form of higher tuition fees? I think the former (we all pay, because it benefits us all collectively, regardless of who uses it), the guiding principle behind free high school education, free health care, and any welfare state measure, is more fundamentally correct. Survey the students of BC and you'll find most agree.

 

In all your ranting you've made exactly one valid complaint: under the NDP, space for students to take health care courses did not increase. Is this a valid complaint? Yes. Does it make the NDP worse than the Liberals? Of course not.

[Matt]

I do not think the tuition should be raised further than the rate of inflation now because we have made up for the money lost now. I do not believe a freeze is fair to the tax payers though some of who already have burdens of their own.

 

What the Liberals did was jump start the economy so more money would come in to be re-invested in the programs. They had to make quick decisive action, tough calls basically, but as you can see more money is flowing in now than it was under the N.D.P.

 

The Liberals can do better for teachers, such as investing further into the education which the Liberals have done some work on already. I believe what the Liberals are doing is planning on how to spend the money to ensure it is used up well, rather than giving the money straight up.

 

Some people in B.C. may remember Bob Smith recently who was fired from the Fraser Valley Health Authority. He was sitting on a large sum of money and not re-investing it into the health care system. He submitted some plans, but they were not as detailed as the Liberals wanted. This is also backs up my earlier thought that they are planning first.

Edited April 16, 2005 by Matt

[Trayas]

Hey Matt. The problem with the teachers is not a tutition freeze. It is with class sizes and the right to strike. First off: The right to strike has been taken away from teachers within B.C. This has nothing to do with money at all. You can shout of numbers all you want about how they help raise the budject but people's basic rights have been taken away

Second off: Class sizes. Now to you it may seem like basic bitching and complaining but to them it is a matter of great importance. I currently have heard of teachers with a total of seven labeled students in there classes and no special needs training. Now this does not only hurt the teacher but the students to. A student will nt get the attention needed if there teach is too busy dealing with a kid with ADHD.

[Bizud]

What the Liberals did was jump start the economy so more money would come in to be re-invested in the programs. They had to make quick decisive action, tough calls basically, but as you can see more money is flowing in now than it was under the N.D.P.

 

Coughcough

 

Yeah, that there stagnant economy (4th highest economic growth in the province) really got a jump start, it did. Whooee.

[Bizud]

Someone on the rabble.ca forums posted this:

 

What I want the NDP to do if they form the government is cancel all excess student loan debt run up to pay for the Liberals' misguided tuition fee increases. I then want them to fire the Board of Governors of every university, and then I want the Minister of Advanced Education to come around personally to every university, haul the university president before the student population, and yell "FIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRREEEEEEEED!" at the jackass of an excuse for a president that every uni has, because all they did was toady up to the government and pass on the tuition fee increases without even attempting to consult with students.

 

And I wholeheartedly agree.

[Munk]

Where're my numbers?

 

I was promised sources for claims outside of that one Liberal homepage.

[Matt]

Hey Matt. The problem with the teachers is not a tutition freeze. It is with class sizes and the right to strike. First off: The right to strike has been taken away from teachers within B.C. This has nothing to do with money at all. You can shout of numbers all you want about how they help raise the budject but people's basic rights have been taken away

Second off: Class sizes. Now to you it may seem like basic bitching and complaining but to them it is a matter of great importance. I currently have heard of teachers with a total of seven labeled students in there classes and no special needs training. Now this does not only hurt the teacher but the students to. A student will nt get the attention needed if there teach is too busy dealing with a kid with ADHD.

I have been in classes with 38 students, and I have learned the same amount if not more in those classes than in smaller class sized classrooms. It depends on the teacher and their willingness to work with the students to ensure they are successful, as well as the students' willingness to ensure they are successful as well. Also, the teachers can be legislated back to work anyways even without the essential services policy. But the Liberals, or any other party would still have to define what and how it is an essential service before they lose that right. Also, essential services is neccessary because some strikes are un-neccessary and only hurt students. The ferry workers striking also can cause problems for the Island since many of their supplies come through the ferry system.

 

Also students should have their tuition fees raised at the rate of inflation. That way the amount they pay is equal to the amount that has been paid in the past. Also to leave extra money which could be used to maintain the schools well. Also the money can be used in other areas as well.

[Munk]

;)

 

:angry:

 

 

......