Democracy never a waste of time

An article form the CP suggests that the Ontario election was pointless because it might not lead to any major change.

They are wrong. Democracy is never a waste of time.

Of course, in Canada we have a distorted version of democracy because of our primitive, 19th-century voting system, First-Past-the-Post.

It awards absolute power to arbitrary minority parties on 40% of the vote, leaving the actual majority excluded from government. Or leads to short-lived minority governments where parties jockey for more power instead of govern.

Coalition government

In the rest of the developed world, multi-party coalition governments are the norm and they usually serve out the entire 4-year term without incident.

In Canada, coalition government is either a dirty word or political ploy, although certainly a legal form of government.

We should have more coalitions. If the Liberals and NDP have enough combined seats for a majority, they should put together a coalition that commits to an entire 4-year term and do what voters put them there to do: govern.

Voting reform

We also need to modernize our voting system with either ranked ballot voting or proportional representation (true voting) to ensure an actual majority is represented in government like 31 of 34 developed countries.

Ranked ballot voting fixes our existing system, locally, by ensuring politicians are elected by a majority. It stops vote splitting and ends 4-year dictatorships on 40% of the vote.

PR true voting ensures parties get the same percent of seats they got in votes by redistributing votes at a federal or provincial level. It’s the most-widely used system in the developed world, embraced by 29 of 34 countries.

Austerity doomed to fail

This election, Tim Hudak is another Mike Harris. That’s obvious.

But although Kathleen Wynne is pretending to be the “social justice” leader, as Bloomberg points out, she’s actually a “less draconian Harris” planning the “biggest Ontario cuts since 1995” when Harris came to power.

Great Depression austerity mistake

John Keynes — the father of centrist mixed-market economics responsible for a 30-year post-war boom — urged more government spending to end the Great Depression during the 1930s.

Governments balked, implemented austerity and prolonged the slump.

As Keynes pointed out, “the boom, not the slump, is the time for austerity.”

History repeats

Paul Krugman is a modern day Keynes. He’s been urging fiscal stimulus (government spending) to end the Great Recession since the free-market collapse in 2008.

But governments have been repeating the same mistakes of the 1930s, with the same disastrous results.

America

Krugman pointed out how American cuts have cost $200-billion a year in economic growth and added one point to the unemployment rate.

Europe

Europe embraced austerity and killed off their recovery. The bond-rating agency Standards & Poors actually downgraded European countries back in 2012 for plans to cut spending:

As such, we believe that a reform process based on a pillar of fiscal austerity alone risks becoming self-defeating, as domestic demand falls in line with consumers’ rising concerns about job security and disposable incomes, eroding national tax revenues.

IMF

The IMF recently documented how austerity has caused much more damage than right-wing experts had anticipated.

Indeed, if the fiscal multiplier is really, really high in certain situations—such as during a downturn— then austerity could prove counterproductive.

Those higher taxes and severe spending cuts will cripple growth so much that the nation will end up with an even bigger deficit than it started out with.

Debt burden

Since the debt burden is measured in debt/GDP, this means austerity actually increases the debt burden by slowing GDP growth. Economic growth since the 2008 meltdown is already anemic.

In the post-WW2 era, we paid down the debt by increasing government spending. Infrastructure and social spending created jobs and growth which raised tax revenues. Debt was paid down to 45% by the 1970s from over 100% after the war.

All pain no gain

Instead of inflicting pointless pain on the people and making the economy and debt-burden worse, we need to slow deficit-reduction plans.

As the IMF’s chief economist noted: “Decreasing debt is a marathon, not a sprint. Going too fast will kill growth.”

Progressive taxation

We also need to embrace the tax fairness we had in the post-WW2 era by eliminating costly tax cuts for the rich. These have added to soaring inequality which has caused economic growth to dwindle.

In Ontario, Mike Harris cut income taxes by 30% causing a $5.6-billion structural deficit we never recovered from. These tax cuts must be eliminated on the highest bracket.

Pointless corporate tax cuts

The Liberals also — outrageously — cut corporate taxes from 14% to 11.5% in 2010. (The NDP stopped them from cutting them to 10% in 2011.) This added $2.4-billion to a $10-billion deficit!

Considering Canada has the lowest corporate tax rate of ALL major economies, we must raise corporate taxes higher than 14%.

Step in the right direction

Only Andrea Horwath and Tom Mulcair plan to reverse these absurd corporate tax cuts. But much more needs to be done.

Ed Broadbent blasts Wynne’s presumptuous rhetoric

Apparently, Kathleen Wynne has become the champion of the poor and huddled masses this election. According to her, she has picked up the NDP torch left behind when Andrea Horwath abandoned her principles to become the “right-wing Rob Ford party.”

Of course it turns out Wynne wants left-leaning votes a lot more than she wants to represent them.

It turns out her “most progresssive budget in two decades” is also the most regressive budget in two decades according a Bloomberg analysis. They say Wynne will bring in the “biggest cuts since 1995.”

Ms. Wynne, you are no Ed Broadbent

Aside from claiming to be the party of “social justice,” Wynne has taken to invoking past NDP leaders whom she says Andrea has betrayed. One of them was Ed Broadbent.

Ed minced no words putting Wynne in her place:

Partisan debate is one thing, but by invoking my name in weekend speeches and articles to attack Andrea Horwath and the Ontario NDP, Kathleen Wynne has gone beyond the pale.

Let no one doubt: I fully support Andrea Horwath and the Ontario NDP.

Blast from the Past

David Reevely of the Ottawa Citizen noticed a parallel between Wynne’s government weighed down in scandal and that of Paul Martin’s in 2006.

In a column titled, If you invoke Ed Broadbent, you’d better know what you’re doing, he points out what Ed Broadbent — as an NDP MP under Jack Layton’s leadership — said of the Liberals back then:

No matter how unethical, undemocratic, and unprincipled the Liberal Party becomes, the team of insiders at the top can simply not imagine people choosing to take power away.

It should be taken away…its conduct in office has not been ethical. Its contempt for Parliament is rivaled only by its manipulation of voters.

Reevely concludes:

In his final statement as an MP in 2006, Ed said that the Liberals had lost the moral authority to govern.

And so too have the Ontario Liberals.

Biggest irony of the Ontario 2014 Election goes too…

Wynne says the NDP turned down the “most progressive budget in decades.”

Of course, this implies there was two decades of regressive PC and Liberal government. None of it was close to the left side of the political spectrum, that's for sure.

But it gets even better.

Progressive regression

According to Bloomberg, Wynne's platform actually contains the biggest cuts in decades: Wynne’s Budget Fortells Biggest Ontario Cuts Since Harris. Describes Wynne as a “less draconian Harris.”

Looks like the most progressive budget in decades also happens to be the most regressive budget in decades.

I imagine partisan cognitive dissonance of this magnitude must fry more brain cells than a crystal meth binge! Looks like I tore up my federal Liberal membership card Justin time!

Fooling pro-social

If Wynne does fool enough left-leaning voters into supporting her progressive/ regressive vision for Ontario, one has to wonder if Liberal progressives will even remember she ran on a progressive platform 3 years from now when we're eye-ball deep in “pain.”

I'm more than a little skeptical.

The fire

Many so-called progressives take an odd comfort in being in the frying pan rather than in the fire.

This certainly doesn't go unnoticed by those pulling the strings of the Liberal party. Every election Liberals raise the alarm about how terrible the fire is, hoping no one will notice how hot it's getting in the frying pan.

My “right-wing Rob Ford” idea of progressive is getting out of the frying pan and away from the fire!

In a hurry

It used to be said that the NDP was the Liberal party in a hurry. But over the past 20 years or so, it's become painfully obvious the neo-cons have taken on that role…

Don’t listen to rhetoric, compare platforms for yourself

This Ontario election, the Liberal party and Toronto Star have used the most outrageous partisan rhetoric trying to weasel Left votes for a fake majority.

They are calling NDP leader Andrea Horwath a right-wing Margaret Thatcher and Rob Ford clone. This isn’t stretching the truth a little. It’s outright lying.

In my opinion, a party willing to do anything for power doesn’t deserve it. But this is something for voters to decide.

Campaign left, govern right

Voters should also be aware that a Bloomberg analysis of Wynne’s platform reveals it to be anything but “pro-social”.

They say she’s a “less draconian Harris” planning the “biggest Ontario cuts since 1995” when Mike Harris came to power.

Compare

Which platorm is more progressive?

Policy	Liberal	NDP	Winner
Minimum wage	$11/hr indexed to inflation.	$12/hr indexed to inflation.	NDP
Corporate taxes	Keep McGuinty’s $2.4-billion a year in tax cuts.	Reverse tax cuts by $760-million a year. Close tax loopholes.	NDP
Income taxes	Raise taxes on top 2% by $600-million.	Raise taxes on top 2% by $600-million (taken from 2014 budget.)	Tie
$29-billion TISAP transit plan	Support plan.	Support plan.	Tie
Social assistance & disability rates	1% rate hike.	Index to inflation (average 2% increase a year.)	NDP
Personal Support Worker wages	Raise by $4/hr.	No committment.	OLP
Child care	Complete roll-out of full-day kindergarten	$260-million investment in child care spaces	NDP
Electricity rates	33% hike next 3 years, cut debt charge, 10% low-income assistance program.	Cut HST & debt charge, plan to reduce rates.	NDP
Extended pension plan	Ontario plan. Maclean’s: good for high-income earners, bad for low-income.	Like other provinces, wait until 2015 federal election before proceeding.	NDP
Ontario Child Benefit	Increase $8.33/month (8.3%), index to inflation ($1310/yr.)	Increase $8.33/month (8.3%), index to inflation ($1310/yr.)	Tie
Student tuition	Keep 30% tuition cut.	Keep 30% tuition cut + freeze tuition + 0% interest on student loans.	NDP
Child nutrition	$11.6-million a year increase.	$15-million a year increase.	NDP
Dental care for kids	Expand coverage for 70,000 kids.	Expand coverage for 100,000 kids.	NDP
Health clinics	Open 36 new health clinics.	Open 50 24-hour health clinics, alternative to ER.	NDP
Cutting ‘waste’	$1.25-billion a year.	$600-million a year.	NDP

Conclusion

This election, vote on facts and vote on principle.

Notes

The NDP platform is based on revenue sources from the Liberal 2014 budget. This includes things like the cancelation of the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit on electric bills and the $600M income tax hike on the top 2% income earners.

The Ontario Child Benefit included in the Liberal 2014 is also supported by the NDP. So is the Liberal 30% Off Tuition Grant.

NDP pocket-book populism great idea

For decades, the NDP has sat on the sidelines watching Conservative and Liberal governments tear down a Just Society.

The neo-cons come in with reckless tax cuts that primarily benefit the rich: Mulroney, Harris and Harper. Then “Liberals” get power and cement them in place: Chretien, Martin, McGuinty, Wynne and now Trudeau.

This “starve the beast” see-saw ratchets the pendulum further and further right.

It causes soaring inequality, dwindling economy growth, rising government debt and the hollowing out of the middle class. In short, it’s destroying the strong economy we built up in the post-WW2 era using centrist mixed-market economics.

New direction

The only hope Canada has to stop this course of self-destruction is if the NDP forms the government. But the only way they can do that is if they appeal to a broad range of voters. That’s how democracy works.

Pocket-book populism is the key. These measures benefit all members of society, but they benefit low-income earners the most.

This is the opposite of right-wing populism like across-the-board tax cuts — or even worse, corporate tax cuts — that primarily benefit the rich.

Splitting the right vote

With our primitive voting system, First-Past-the-Post, the neo-con party gets absolute power on 40% of the vote due to vote splitting. (In a real democracy, which 31 of 34 developed countries have, 50% is required for an absolute majority.)

To keep the neo-con party away from government, the right-leaning vote must be split.

The Liberals typically split the right vote by appealing to red Tory voters. They adopt a moderate form of neo-liberal ideology. Unfortunately, they become the red Tory party in the process.

The NDP’s pocket-book populism is in the self-interest of all voters, including right-leaning ones. This will help the Liberals split the right vote and keep neo-cons from power.

Protest party

Being a protest party is doing no one any good. Proposing lofty social benefits Liberal and Con majority governments simply ignore does no good.

It’s time for progressives and centrists to join forces to save Canada from this neo-liberal plague of the past 30 years. It’s not only tearing down the Just Society built up in the post-war era, it’s destroying the economy in the process.

The Star’s most outrageous partisan rhetoric

I consider myself a non-partisan centrist liberal. Although I support the NDP this election in Ontario, I’m not a blind partisan married to any party.

This election, for me, is not about my team winning. It’s about moving the pendulum from the right-wing back towards the center where it was back in the Peterson era (for example.)

I think the Toronto Star’s Liberal bias this election is painfully obvious. They’ve written about 30 op-eds that smear Andrea Horwath and outright lie.

If one views politics like sports, you’ll believe that whatever lucky break your team gets you won fair and square. But when we’re talking about the role of the fourth estate, campaigning for a party is a clear violation of the rules.

Back in the day

Back during the 2011 federal election, I supported Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. The Toronto Star ended up endorsing Jack Layton. But I didn’t notice The Star promoting NDP talking points and strategies, or unfairly attacking Ignatieff. Back then they had high standards of journalistic integrity.

Not all Star journalists are sell-outs this election. Tim Harper is an example of honest, objective journalism. He has written two columns that touch on the Ontario election. There are no biases. No partisan agenda. He describes Andrea’s NDP as a “drift to the middle” — which it clearly is if you have any comprehension of the left-right economic political spectrum.

Liberal strategy

Before I get into exposing The Star’s most outrageous partisan rhetoric, I will point out the Liberal strategy this election, since it’s obviously related.

Considering the Liberals lost a fake majority by one seat in 2011, their game plan this time around is to elbow out the NDP and win enough left-leaning votes to secure their majority.

The Liberal long game is to destroy centrist NDP leaders like Andrea Horwath and Tom Mulcair. If they can divide-and-conquer the NDP, the party might react by electing ideological leadership. This will marginalize the party like it was under Howard Hampton and Alexa McDonough and pave the way for Liberal fake majorities.

The Star’s most outrageous partisan rhetoric

• Andrea is a “right-wing populist”: Ronald Reagan was a right-wing populist. Brought in big income tax cuts from which the wealthy benefited the most.

  Andrea is clearly not a “starve the beast” neo-con trying to destroy post-war centrist “big government.”

  Following in Jack Layton’s footsteps, Andrea is a “pocket book” populist. Clearly left-wing. The idea is to make life more affordable for people struggling in an anemic economy with rising bills, fees and regressive taxes.

  Her measures do not benefit the rich the most. They benefit low-income the most. Of course, they are meant to appeal to the most people to attract the most votes. (It’s called democracy.)

• Andrea is Margaret Thatcher: This is the complete negation of the truth. Thatcher made deep spending cuts, cut public benefits, busted unions, privatized public utilities. Really?

• Andrea is Rob Ford: This particular propaganda is based on Andrea’s pledge to cut $600-million in bureaucratic waste, which is a modest 0.5% of the budget. Nothing like Ford’s right-wing “gravy train” rhetoric.

  The absurd reality is that Wynne’s budget contains her own $1.25-billion in cuts to bureaucratic waste. Add hypocrisy to the ridiculous smear.

• Andrea supports a coalition with Hudak: This groundless story was concocted by Thomas Walkom, which Wynne ran with. (In fact, Wynne set the stage by raising the coalition issue out of the blue two days before.) Wynne went on a tirade condemning Andrea for the imaginary coalition.

  A few days later, Wynne hypocritically said she would prop up a Hudak minority. (See the whole sordid story here.)

• Andrea abandoned her party’s principles/commitment to the poor: According to Liberals, the job of the NDP is to propose big social policies — as a minor opposition party to a Liberal or PC majority — which are to be summarily ignored as Liberals and PCs slash benefits to the poor and disabled.

  The NDP are smart to realize that an incremental approach is better, especially with the pendulum way out on the right side. In a democracy, broad support is required to govern and get something accomplished. Compromise is an unavoidable requirement.

• Andrea rejected the most progressive budget in decades: After 20 years of regressive PC and Liberal governments? The Wynne government fell because of corruption, waste and broken promises. Instead of seeking support for her budget, Wynne ran attack ads.

  (Contrary to a long-held Liberal belief, Liberals are not entitled to power.)

  Wynnes’s budget is far from progressive. According to Bloomberg, it contains the “biggest cuts since 1995” when Mike Harris came to power.

  Her pension plan is also regressive. According to Maclean’s, it gives high-income earners a boost, but gouges low-income like the federal Liberal EI reforms of the Chretien era.

• Wynne is campaigning on a stronger social justice platform than Andrea: If you compare platforms, it’s clear that Andrea is to the left of Wynne, as you would expect.

  Wynne’s real agenda is to campaign from the left, win a majority, then govern from the right. (A strategy Chretien was infamous for.)

  Bloomberg says Wynne’s platform contains the “biggest Ontario cuts since 1995” when Mike Harris came to power. Calls Wynne a “less draconian” Harris. Anyone who associates that with social justice doesn’t remember Harris very well.

• Andrea is creating another liberal party: If Andrea has turned the NDP into a centrist liberal party, hers would be the only one.

  Over the past 20 years, the Liberal party abandoned centrist liberal values for neo-liberal ideology. They have embraced big spending cuts, cuts to public benefits, corporate tax cuts, privatization and small government.

  They have been enablers of a neo-con “starve the beast” agenda. Neo-cons like Mulroney, Harris and Harper bring in huge tax cuts that primarily benefit the rich. Then "Liberals" like Chretien, Martin, McGuinty, Wynne and now Justin Trudeau cement them in place. The pendulum gets ratcheted further and further rightwards every time.

  Why shouldn’t the NDP represent centrist liberals the Liberal party abandoned decades ago?