Wednesday, December 3, 2008

The Fall of the Canadian Government

So, I was going to try and explain this whole mess, but I could not match the description given above. She did a phenomenal job.

Basically, my country's government is about to fall, one way or a-tuther as I see it. I really don't envy the position of Governor General Madame Michaelle Jean.

Let me just say this about that. I am torn. Completely. First, I don't think a minority government is an effective way to govern, since motions are either passed by threat, or not at all. So, either nothing gets done, or the ruling party has the ability to really screw everyone over. In short, I blame our lazy-ass non-voting populace for getting us into this mess. Even had it been a Conservative majority, at least we wouldn't be in this position.

I don't want our government disrupted in any way right now, because I know that the economy is in trouble...The TSX is plummeting, and I don't personally believe that GG Jean dropping the election writ, or handing the keys over to the Liberals is necessarily a good idea at the moment.

Here's the thing, this article makes a strong point. The vast majority of Canadians (as in 2/3's) did NOT vote for this Conservative government. However, the majority of Canadians also did not vote Liberal, NDP, Bloc Quebecois, or Green. I am a Green party supporter, being a staunch lefty, but even I am able to take a step back at this moment and see the problem here. I voted Green. I did not vote Liberal, NDP, etc. I am an educated voter, as well, and so there was a reason why I did not vote for those parties. They are simply not aligned with my values in the same fashion that are the Greens. Therefore, the Libs are not, in fact, representative of my values.

Another problem, as I see it, is the current Liberal leadership. I might be more open to this coalition if the Libs had already run their leadership race, and Stephane Dion had been replaced by Michael Ignatieff, which I suspect would have happened. My problem with Stephane Dion is not his moral fibre; rather, from everything I've heard, read, etc., he seems like not only a man of integrity, but a kind and genuine person. The problem, I believe, comes from the fact that he is very entrenched in Academia, having been a long-time University professor, and as far as I know, his actual experience as far as relating to the average person with a job and a family is minimal at best. I want him teaching me political science, not practicing it on Parliament Hill. I do wish him the very best, though.

I also am not in favour of corporate bailouts. I frankly have a bit of a problem with the fact that when times are hot, Capitalists tout the virtues of the free market, but when that free market falls (as any free market will--there WILL be boom and bust cycles, period), all of a sudden they have their hands out for money from the taxpayers. Sorry folks, but if you liked it so much when times were good, you should have been a good little squirrel and put away money for a rainy day, and maybe invested in updating your product (bio-diesel vehicles anyone?). I'm no economist, but it seems to me that whether you are running a household, a government, or a business, it should always be on the principle of saving when things are good to help you through the bad times.

Am I happy that people will lose their jobs if these companies bankrupt? No, of course not. This system is not set up, though, to support long-term industry, and anything based on a non-renewable resource is at risk. The question would only have been whether it would have tanked today or a couple of years down the road. From destruction comes rebirth, like the larch tree growing up out of the remnants of a forest fire. I would prefer to see my tax dollars going toward helping those people to pay their bills in the meantime and find a career in a more long-term industry than toward a bunch of CEO's that want $5M golden parachutes when they finally decide to stop billing the company hourly for their golf games.

This having been a fairly major issue to inspire the non-confidence vote to begin with, I have to say that I'm with the Conservatives on this particular issue. If this is a free market, then it is. If it is not, then with your bailout, you better expect us to regulate the hell out of your ass, including enforcing anti-trust laws, which have been long ignored by way of loopholes and subsequent precedents, deciding on the payscale of the executives, and regulating the implementation of employee benefits, ensuring that companies must provide adequate benefits, regular pay raises, and adequate family time, while also ensuring that a large percentage of profits are overturned into the re-investment into sustainable product and industrial practices.

Just my opinion. :S

Anyone who knows me knows how much I DON'T want to agree with the Conservatives. But I have to agree with them on this one. You can't spend your way out of a recession, and I really do believe that we have to tighten our belts, and worry about looking after PEOPLE with our limited resources, rather than corporations and (pardon the rhetoric) the fat cats that haven't had to work for their money for the last 3 decades.

While we're at it, how about making sure that there are some concessions made to shrink the government a bit, shedding some dead weight. I could think of at least 3 families and small businesses that could use that income more than an 85 year old wealthy Senator who hasn't shown up for work in twenty years.

P.S.- If you know his address, maybe you should swing by his place to check on him. Just a thought.

We'll know what's going on by Monday. If you're from here, I'm sure you're glued to CBC. If you're not, wish us luck. This could be a bumpy ride. :S

Oh, and if you didn't vote?

Go fuck yourself.


Willow Goldentree said...

Awesome post and I wish you the BEST of luck. :S

Anann said...

Thanks, Love. ;)