BC Election 2013

[Gridlock]

Originally Posted by BurnoutBinLaden

Mixed member proportional representation is what they use in the German parliament. It's way better than the dinosaur FPTP electoral system here.

This is key!

You change the way we elect representatives, and you immediately kill the death grip that a majority government has for 4 years of our country/province.

in the US, its ALL checks and balances leading to a stalemate situation, like now. In Canada? Its NO checks, NO balances. The opposition basically shows up so we don't forget their names...but have zero power.

The most effective governments(good or bad) have been minority governments. In fact, other than their current opposition party status, for years, the NDP's only claim to fame was holding the balance of power in Trudeau's minority government. It's how we got PetroCanada. (we're still wondering why...)

[Gridlock]

It's interesting Mindbomber...I hope in the days, hours or minutes ahead, that every party except for NDP and Liberals pull their heads out of their asses and go and get their names out there.

I'm going to be blunt in my disclosures here...I really don't like the NDP. I know! Shocker.

But I fully respect the decision of anyone to vote for whatever candidate you think is best.
BUT:

I fear that a lot of the surge in NDP support is related to "hate the liberals...lets go with these guys". They are cut from the same cloth. I am a liberal at heart. Have been since I was 10. I like a business favored platform with a softer side. I find the NDP to mushy, and the conservatives too icy. Even I have to say that the liberals have to go.

But I feel that a lot of people are going to regret their decision in about 2014, as they weren't true NDP'ers to begin with. The liberals will be gone, so mission accomplished and then we have "liberal-lite". Half the calories but twice the fat.

This is a great election to have a good mix of candidates. Hell, I'll even celebrate a green win. At this point...I'd even celebrate a commie(which, learned today that the NDP candidate in my area used to be). I'll celebrate anyone that's new.

I'm really disappointed that everyone took the 'NDPnough' bumper stickers off their cars(or most likely bought new ones once the economy bounced back when the libs won)

A list of NDP highlights:

Casinogate(something Mr.Dix should be able to recall with great pride)
How are those new ferries working out? Must be encouraging to see the NDP legacy in operation when he visits...oh, right...they didn't work
Speed cameras(everyone forgets those)

Oh, and the economy crapped out.

Why do people think they are suddenly going to get it right this time? And why do people think the liberals even deserve to be official opposition?

I say wipe them all out, and start fresh.

[Gridlock]

Ok, I am interested in capturing the details of the spending.

So, super simple...let's lay it out. The NDP is saying the liberal deficit is 790 million. So we're going to use that as a baseline, as it makes this a lot easier. In order to come out to the deficit amount as a zero figure, we need to raise revenue to match any increased spending.

Income/Revenue:
BC NDP lays out 2013 election platform fiscal plan | BC NDP

• Corporate income tax rate increased from 11 to 12 per cent. 
Effective October 1, 2013, this measure will add $100 million in revenue in 2013-14, and $200 million in 2014-15 and 2015-16. British Columbia will still have the fifth-lowest corporate tax rate in Canada. There will be no increase to the small business rate or the small business earnings threshold.

+100M 2013 +200M 2014 +200M 2015

• Corporation capital tax reinstated on financial institutions. Effective October 1, 2013, the NDP will reinstate the corporation capital tax on financial institutions. Banks will pay three per cent, while financial institutions with headquarters in BC including credit unions will pay one per cent. Credit unions with capital holdings less than $20 million will be exempt. This measure will add $75 million in revenue in 2013-14, and $150 million in 2014-15 and 2015-16.

+75M 2013 +150M 2014 +150M 2015

• High income earners’ personal income tax increased.
 Effective January 1, 2014, the top two per cent of high income earners in BC will see an increase to 19 per cent on taxable individual income above $150,000. This measure will add $50 million in revenue in 2013-14, $200 million in 2014-15 and $240 million in 2015-16.

+50M 2013 +200M 2014 +240M 2015

• Carbon Tax base expanded to vented oil and gas emissions.
 Effective April 1, 2014, an NDP government will expand the application base of the carbon tax to include vented emissions from oil and gas operations, capturing an additional five per cent of carbon emissions in the province and contributing to British Columbia's climate action goals. This measure will add $35 million in revenue in 2014-15, $70 million in 2015-16, and $100 million in 2016-17. The objective of this measure is to ultimately drive down emissions and stimulate innovation in the sector.

+0M 2013 +35M 2014 +70M 2015

• Existing and budgeted BC Liberal government spending reallocated to new priorities.
An NDP government will reallocate some program and discretionary spending to new priorities, shifting $86 million in 2013-14, $148 million in 2014-15 and $328 million in 2015-16. Some examples of program reallocations include:
- the BC Training and Education Savings Grant and Early Years Strategy will be repurposed into a new childcare and early education plan; and,
- the Early Childhood Tax Benefit will be repurposed as part of a new poverty reduction strategy.

I'm going to include shifted money as 'new' money as something suffers at a new expense

+86M 2013 +148M 2014 +328M 2015

Total:

+311M 2013 +733M 2014 +988M 2015

Spending:

Arts
NDP promises to boost B.C. Arts Council budget to $29 million | Georgia Straight

-3M 2013 -4M 2014 -5M 2015(assumed based on increasing by 5 million over 3 years)

Welfare
BC NDP Promise Welfare Raise, Family Bonus Program

558 million over 3 years
-58M 2013 -200M 2014 -300M 2015(assumed spread, weighted towards year 3)

Film

Dix

45M annually(with 93 million in additional revenue-to me that implies economic spinoff, so I'm not going to include it. Obviously, yes, that would come back in taxes, but so hard to track. If it was direct income to gov't, the liberals would make that deal all day long.

-45M 2013 -45M 2014 -45M 2015

Agriculture

NDP promises $24 million to grow local agriculture industry | Globalnews.ca

8M annual
-8M 2013 -8M 2014 -8M 2015

BC Ferries
NDP would freeze ferry rates; create student grant program | CTV British Columbia News

-15M 2013 -25M 2014 -0M 2015

Current Total:

Sub: -129M 2013 -282M 2014 -358M 2015
Total(Inc-Spd)
+182M 2013 +451M 2014 +630M 2015

My thoughts:

I don't think you'll see the spend numbers dip into negative territory(obvi, if I can do this math, anyone can) but I do find some of their assumptions to be "dubious" when you start actually looking at it.

1. Increased tax on high earners. I can see a jump in rev for year 2(2014) as you have a full year to realize the revenue, but that is quite a jump into year 3, hopefully accounting for some economic growth, but it also must assume that high income earners won't change their habits.

3. In fact, I find all the year 3 assumptions to be dubious. Here's the beautiful part...its easy to control spending. If I say I'm going to spend $20, I am going to spend $20. If I say I'm going to earn $20...2 years from now...thats now an assumption. It will be difficult to stop a promised program if your revenues don't materialize.

4. It's shown as positive here, but its all negative. Remember, 790M deficit is new normal in this scenario.

Currently planned deficit, using my #'s:

-608M 2013 -339M 2014 -160M 2015

[BurnoutBinLaden]

On the bright side, at least the deficit is going down.

I'm kind of biased because I'm a great big lefty and support much of the proposed spending programs, especially the student aid, ferry freeze and film tax credits.

[Graeme S]

Ignore this, I'm an idiot who can't read.

[4444]

Originally Posted by Gridlock

Liberals love the rich. NDP love the poor.

No one gives one sweet ass fuck about the poor stiff that is too rich for the free ride, and not rich enough to buy his own.

Oh, u mean the majority!!!

I think I'm going to move out of province (perhaps out of country) if the NDP win.

This would be the final straw for me. I can't handle any higher taxes, they're too high as is on earned income, and we have too many government run programs as is. Not that I have a problem with programs that help ppl, allow ppl to grow, allow ppl to get a better quality if life - it's just that government run programs are innately inefficient, poorly run, and are usually run to suit some politiician's personal bias, which provides a much lower quality of program and benefit to the people.

I don't have a solution for this, other than to have less programs and lower taxes, but that's not ideal for lower income people - and u see why I'm no politician

[BurnoutBinLaden]

Originally Posted by Graeme S

You misunderstand. Grid is saying that "zero" is the existing 790m Liberal deficit. The minuses are in addition to the existing 790m Liberal deficit.

Goddammit...

I think they'll have to back down on some of these election promises when they see the fiscal reality.

[Gridlock]

Originally Posted by BurnoutBinLaden

Goddammit...

I think they'll have to back down on some of these election promises when they see the fiscal reality.

Yes and no. Their plan is to spike revenue, and increase spending, "the classic tax and spend". Its tough to talk through a spreadsheet in text,n but basically the numbers at the very bottom of my post represent the planned deficit when they apply what's left of their planned, increased revenue(should pigs fly and they achieve it).

So, at the end of 4 years, at the next election they are planning to have a balanced budget.
Posted via RS Mobile

[Gridlock]

Originally Posted by Graeme S

You misunderstand. Grid is saying that "zero" is the existing 790m Liberal deficit. The minuses are in addition to the existing 790m Liberal deficit.

Sorry, no. They are planning on a balnced budget in 4 years. Numbers at bottom represent their planned deficit(with my assumptions which are highlighted)
Posted via RS Mobile

[BurnoutBinLaden]

That is some interesting analysis Mr. Gridlock. CBC should be paying you to come onto Power & Politics instead of the usual jibbering clowns.

[E60_M5]

Might as well go on welfare, EI and collect whatever the NDP will give out. Find some cash part time jobs and live the good life.

[Graeme S]

I think those kinds of comments are so very frustrating for me for many reasons. There are a lot of people out there who say that they would work hard every day whether they were rich or poor no matter what because it's a question of self-esteem. “I have too much pride to just sit around and do nothing”.

But these same people are often the people who will turn around and say “Well I guess once we start supporting these bums they'll have even less reason to get up and get a job!” According to the Fraser Institute (ever a bastion of telling welfare to fuck off), as a single employable adult, I can collect a grand total of $7100 for the year! Link

HALLELUJAH, MY WORKING DAYS ARE DONE!

Fuck that. If I had to survive on seven grand for a year I'd be royally and massively screwed if I didn't have familial support. I mean, seven grand is what...rent? And then there's food. Transportation. So you tell me to get a job. Where in that seven grand am I supposed to be getting bus fare? Interview clothes? Food so I can actually have enough energy to work?



I hate leeches as much as the next guy. MORE than the next guy, actually because I am in support of welfare. And every time I say we need to make welfare better, or improve the benefits, people throw the moochers and leeches in my face. And I really really wish I could weed those fuckers out. Because supporting the people who NEED support is incredibly important. If we don't support them, they won't get back on their feet, and they'll end up being a burden for fucking forever.

[Gridlock]

Originally Posted by Graeme S

I think those kinds of comments are so very frustrating for me for many reasons. There are a lot of people out there who say that they would work hard every day whether they were rich or poor no matter what because it's a question of self-esteem. “I have too much pride to just sit around and do nothing”.

But these same people are often the people who will turn around and say “Well I guess once we start supporting these bums they'll have even less reason to get up and get a job!” According to the Fraser Institute (ever a bastion of telling welfare to fuck off), as a single employable adult, I can collect a grand total of $7100 for the year! Link

HALLELUJAH, MY WORKING DAYS ARE DONE!

Fuck that. If I had to survive on seven grand for a year I'd be royally and massively screwed if I didn't have familial support. I mean, seven grand is what...rent? And then there's food. Transportation. So you tell me to get a job. Where in that seven grand am I supposed to be getting bus fare? Interview clothes? Food so I can actually have enough energy to work?



I hate leeches as much as the next guy. MORE than the next guy, actually because I am in support of welfare. And every time I say we need to make welfare better, or improve the benefits, people throw the moochers and leeches in my face. And I really really wish I could weed those fuckers out. Because supporting the people who NEED support is incredibly important. If we don't support them, they won't get back on their feet, and they'll end up being a burden for fucking forever.

Bravo!

I haven't had a huge amount of experience with people on social assistance. The only real experience I have is with renting to them. And I don't. I weed them out.

I'll tell you why.

We have one success story. Single woman...had 2 kids. Nice girl. Kind of meek and quiet. She was friendly and nice. Apartment was clean. No drama. She was working hard to get ahead.

We have had: one couple that was scamming the system based on living together but the gov't thought they lived separate-kicked them out. One guy that would get checks from the gov't but still be late with rent. His girlfriend was buying drugs-kicked them out. One girl that was young...had a room of people tell me she was the one that was worth the shot, and all these family members would cover any damage or issue-trashed the place and I'm chasing them 9 months later to get the remaining $500. Another one that was behind on rent with 2 able bodied people sitting there complaining the gov't needs to help them out, and then got denied. Still working on packing them out. A power mother/daughter team wanting to rent a 2 bedroom in my pimpy nice building-didn't even consider it. There was more that I just can...wait! the alcoholic 23 year old...collecting welfare. Booted her. Oh! another of what we call "Desiree's Angels"(the social worker that gave me these two youths)...she had her boyfriend living there and smoked pot all the time. Also never met Mr.Clean.

I love that success story. I do. I had one. Every other person that we've dealt with on assistance wants the world-for free!, lives like shit, surrounds themselves with drama, is disrespectful and all around a giant, fucking pain in my ass.

So I say that its an important system to have, and I get that cutting the welfare rolls are hard to do, because they make for good sob stories on the news...but I support it with gritted teeth.

[TheKingdom2000]

Originally Posted by Graeme S

You misunderstand. Grid is saying that "zero" is the existing 790m Liberal deficit. The minuses are in addition to the existing 790m Liberal deficit.

I'm a little confused. So Grid is counting the -790M as zero, which means that if these are the numbers;
-608M 2013
-339M 2014
-160M 2015

The actual numbers are this?
-608 + (-790), 2013
-339 + (-790), 2014
-160 + (-790), 2015

So the NDP aren't balancing the budget at all?

[Graeme S]

No, that was a mistake on my part 'cause I was distracted by work and wasn't reading properly. Ignore my idiocy.

[Gridlock]

..and let's keep in mind that there are assumptions that I made, as some of the promises were put "over 3 years" so I broke it up into each year.

But its not hard math, and its all publicly stated..so I feel very confident in them.

Ultimately, the point I'm trying to make is that instead of using all this "new" revenue that they are taking in through tax hikes(which we are all too happy to take in ps) to pay off the deficit and actually have a balanced budget, they instead said,

Fuck it, let's party like its 1999!

Oh! And the subtle, "we're going to increase the carbon tax, which the liberals always said was to be revenue neutral...we're gonna tax the extra amount, and spend that too"

Sooo...these lying sacks there, we're going to tell the one lie that they weren't willing to.

Come on people! I can't be the only one angry about this shit!

[dinosaur]

Originally Posted by BurnoutBinLaden

That is some interesting analysis Mr. Gridlock. CBC should be paying you to come onto Power & Politics instead of the usual jibbering clowns.

my boy is wicked smart.

[Graeme S]

Originally Posted by dinosaur

my boy is wicked smart.

Wicked awesome smart.

[godwin]

Actually there are other benefits.. eg I know a few people who successfully claimed they are disabled because they abused drugs while younger.. now they are on disability. That gets free transit.

Usually it is not one source of support.

Originally Posted by Graeme S

Fuck that. If I had to survive on seven grand for a year I'd be royally and massively screwed if I didn't have familial support. I mean, seven grand is what...rent? And then there's food. Transportation. So you tell me to get a job. Where in that seven grand am I supposed to be getting bus fare? Interview clothes? Food so I can actually have enough energy to work?

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by godwin

Actually there are other benefits.. eg I know a few people who successfully claimed they are disabled because they abused drugs while younger.. now they are on disability. That gets free transit.

Usually it is not one source of support.

Unless they live in the company of family, it's still a shitty way to live. Unless you're receiving the equivalent of say 30K per year in benefits, who the hell would want to live off the system when you could enjoy a far better living by working a bit and applying yourself?

Scamming the system is for those who have no self-respect.

[Graeme S]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Unless they live in the company of family, it's still a shitty way to live. Unless you're receiving the equivalent of say 30K per year in benefits, who the hell would want to live off the system when you could enjoy a far better living by working a bit and applying yourself?

Scamming the system is for those who have no self-respect.

Which is one of the key points and one of the reasons why I'm a big fan of widely distributed social support housing. "You compare yourself to what you are surrounded by". you live in one of those SROs downtown and you're like "Well, at least I'm not some cracked out tweaker meth-head puking in a dumpster and eating out of it a few minutes later."

You put one social housing unit in an otherwise functional place and actually manage to integrate them into part of the community and they'll actually have some social support/pressure to get earning. Telling people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps isn't always enough. If what we're doing now isn't working (providing them practically nothing and saying 'deal with it') then we need to figure out some way to motivate them intrinsically.

Obviously this kind of pressure doesn't work. So let's find one that does.

[Anjew]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Unless they live in the company of family, it's still a shitty way to live. Unless you're receiving the equivalent of say 30K per year in benefits, who the hell would want to live off the system when you could enjoy a far better living by working a bit and applying yourself?

Scamming the system is for those who have no self-respect.

they make money on the side dealing dope, collecting cans, working under the table.... while i see decent people getting layed off getting nickle and dimed (EI benefits are capped) and trapped (not being able to goto school)by our shitty EI system...

[Graeme S]

Originally Posted by Anjew

they make money on the side dealing dope, collecting cans, working under the table....

Which is why I wish that the government would spend more on monitoring and enforcement. Enforcement of tax and money spent are some of the best ways that the government can spend money. As a huge supporter of a proper social support network, there is very little that pisses me off more than milkers and leeches.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Anjew

they make money on the side dealing dope, collecting cans, working under the table.... while i see decent people getting layed off getting nickle and dimed (EI benefits are capped) and trapped (not being able to goto school)by our shitty EI system...

Collecting cans is a shitty way to earn extra cash and dealing dope ends eventually (how many drug dealers do you know make it to their 40s?). Working under the table, unless you're good with your hands, is not sustainable in the long run. I highly doubt that people scamming the system and working under the table accumulate much wealth over the long run. Assets equal wealth, not flashy cars and handbags for the short-term gold-digger they're sleeping with. Even if you somehow make enough cash drug dealing and working-under-table to accumulate say half a million, the government finds out eventually (unless you're a major player in organized crime which excludes 99% of those scamming the system.)

Most people collect EI at one point or another in their lives. Sure, it's great for a while, but eventually most people get restless and want to get off of it. Why? Because living off the system has a negative stigma associated with it. You're less of a man, so to speak, if you collect assistance for too long.

I have absolute sympathy for those who are getting nickel and dimed, but at some point, people have to take chances, or be proactive and stay on the edge.

You put one social housing unit in an otherwise functional place and actually manage to integrate them into part of the community and they'll actually have some social support/pressure to get earning. Telling people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps isn't always enough. If what we're doing now isn't working (providing them practically nothing and saying 'deal with it') then we need to figure out some way to motivate them intrinsically.

Obviously this kind of pressure doesn't work. So let's find one that does.

Absolutely agree. The NIMBYs in this province will have none of it though. The prevailing attitude today is that it's far easier to sweep things under the rug than to deal with them proactively and this attitude is a major cause of the state of the DTES today.

[dinosaur]

How BC votes: Take a poll-level look at 2009 election results | Globalnews.ca

you can search by your postal code to see voter turn-out and election results.