The Decline of the Liberal Party- Swerved Into a Confederation Topic

[RedFive]

Not to detract from any of the posts in this thread, but I’ve never understood this saying.

Even as a child, when I would hear it, I’d always ask “What’s the point in having cake if we aren’t allowed to eat it?”


Nobody has ever explained to me what this saying actually means.

You can't eat the cake and still have more cake to eat, is how I've always understood it.

Yes, that's exactly what I said. What? Waaaaiit a minute... You must have missed this part..."at least in the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island". I was raised on the Sunshine Coast. All my family except me stayed within a three mile radius of the house we grew up in. My siblings are both classical big money socialists. I've lived it first hand, not like the people I'm trying, and abjectly failing, to address here.

BC isn't the west, it just got drawn on the wrong side of the map.

I didn't miss it, I'm focused on the statement that came after.

I agree with you for the record. I hate the fact the election is over before I even cast my vote. I hate the fact that the interests of the west in general and the prairies specifically are often ignored in order to please the voters who put the government in Ottawa. My family is from the prairies, and most still reside there.

But you can't in the same breath accuse "the east" of not understanding then turn around and dismiss an entire province as misplaced on the map and also against the interests of the prairies. Yes, BC is run by idiots. But there's a lot of people here who don't fit your broad brush strokes, which it seems like you know.

 

[Halifax Tar]

This is absurd.

You’re dividing seats evenly for:
23 million Canadians in ON and QC;
12 million Canadians in BC, AB, SK, MB;
2.4 million Canadians in NB, NS, Nfld, PEI, and;
125 thousand Canadians in YT, NWT, NU.

It sounds like what you really want is an effective senate. The hard reality is that the prairies are already over represented in parliament by MPs per capita. Don’t expect that to swing further in favour of rural ridings.

If Alberta wants more seats in Parliament, it can leverage its wealth - which it very much still has - to attract more people to live there. More population will mean more seats.

What's absurd is this:

there is something inherently wrong with 80% of the people in 20% of the country dictating to 20% of the people in 80% of the country

Equal representation, regardless of population density, will bring parity for all regions and force politicians to work for all and compromise.

Again, for example, Ontario's problems shouldnt hold more political value, because they happen to have a high population density.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No party politics in municipal.

No Liberal / Conservative way to fix a sewer.

Come to NS, party politics is definitely involved in municipal politics.

 

[Kat Stevens]

You can't eat the cake and still have more cake to eat, is how I've always understood it.





I didn't miss it, I'm focused on the statement that came after.

I agree with you for the record. I hate the fact the election is over before I even cast my vote. I hate the fact that the interests of the west in general and the prairies specifically are often ignored in order to please the voters who put the government in Ottawa. My family is from the prairies, and most still reside there.

But you can't in the same breath accuse "the east" of not understanding then turn around and dismiss an entire province as misplaced on the map and also against the interests of the prairies. Yes, BC is run by idiots. But there's a lot of people here who don't fit your broad brush strokes, which it seems like you know.

Which is why I want the fringe element with unacceptable views from the northern half of BC...

 

[brihard]

What's absurd is this:



Equal representation, regardless of population density, will bring parity for all regions and force politicians to work for all and compromise.

Again, for example, Ontario's problems shouldnt hold more political value, because they happen to have a high population density.

No; hectares don’t get votes. Humans do. Trees and factories and lobsters and mineral deposits aren’t represented in Parliament. Humans are.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think one of the underlying elements in this discussion is "INSECURITY".

I don't think those living in cities with assured incomes and pensions can fully appreciate the level of angst associated with living in a resource based economy. You focus on roughnecks with hundred thousand dollar pay checks. You don't see the five years of hard scrabble when the price of oil,or grain tanks or government policies change.

And I will agree that it is not just a western thing but the West seems to lack the level of cushion the government affords the east, including the Atlantic.

 

[Remius]

I think one of the underlying elements in this discussion is "INSECURITY".

I don't think those living in cities with assured incomes and pensions can fully appreciate the level of angst associated with living in a resource based economy. You focus on roughnecks with hundred thousand dollar pay checks. You don't see the five years of hard scrabble when the price of oil,or grain tanks or government policies change.

And I will agree that it is not just a western thing but the West seems to lack the level of cushion the government affords the east, including the Atlantic.

The problem with bust and boom vs diversified economies. Especially one that relies on external factors as much as internal ones.

The gold rush, lumber industry, coal mining etc is a good example of that…

 

[Jarnhamar]

Not to detract from any of the posts in this thread, but I’ve never understood this saying.

Even as a child, when I would hear it, I’d always ask “What’s the point in having cake if we aren’t allowed to eat it?”


Nobody has ever explained to me what this saying actually means.

Wedding cakes.

People want to save their wedding cake but they also want to eat it at the wedding. Can't eat it and save it.

 

[suffolkowner]

I think one of the underlying elements in this discussion is "INSECURITY".

I don't think those living in cities with assured incomes and pensions can fully appreciate the level of angst associated with living in a resource based economy. You focus on roughnecks with hundred thousand dollar pay checks. You don't see the five years of hard scrabble when the price of oil,or grain tanks or government policies change.

And I will agree that it is not just a western thing but the West seems to lack the level of cushion the government affords the east, including the Atlantic.

Ontario has a diversified economy much harder for other areas to approach that level. Saskatchewan has the same population it did 100 yrs ago theyre just not driving a bunch of horses anymore

 

[suffolkowner]

No; hectares don’t get votes. Humans do. Trees and factories and lobsters and mineral deposits aren’t represented in Parliament. Humans are.

the problem with that is eventually I am going to be eaten by a bear because some idiot in Toronto thinks all guns should be banned and thinks chocolate milk comes from brown cows

 

[Kirkhill]

Cities and government jobs
Cities and the Urban/Rural divide
Red/Blue Cities and Blue/Red Hinterland
Cosmopolitan cities
Capital (Capital Cities) Capitalists....

A bit of free association there.

Cosmopolitan Culture - cities all over the world, cities with airports and internet connection - one culture
Cosmopolitan Colonialism
Cosmopolitan Colonies
Cosmopolitan Factories - Moose Factory, York Factory, New Amsterdam, Calcutta
Trading centers that dominate their hinterlands

The hinterlands low density and tied to the land
The cities high density with a split population - low income residents tied to the city block and high income nomads.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Some people on our street are still reeling over having to wheel their garbage to the end of the driveway.

Instead of having it picked up around back, like they used to.

First world problems. I hope they complained to the neighborhood manager

 

[Halifax Tar]

No; hectares don’t get votes. Humans do. Trees and factories and lobsters and mineral deposits aren’t represented in Parliament. Humans are.

Absolutely and they should be represented equally. High population density should not be dictating to low population density.

Treat them equally. They both provide different capabilities to our society and both have intrinsic value. Equal value, treat them as such.

 

[Kirkhill]

Ontario has a diversified economy much harder for other areas to approach that level. Saskatchewan has the same population it did 100 yrs ago theyre just not driving a bunch of horses anymore

100 years ago the farmer and his team of horses struggled to make a living off of a quarter section of 160 acres out west. Plowing "around 40 acres" wouldn't support a family. Now a farmer and his wife driving tractors, combines and trucks can manage a township - and need to to make a living.

The area of Saskatchewan is a lot more productive but won't support a larger population.

The reverse side of the productivity coin. Similar things could be said for Alberta and Manitoba, for mining and forestry and for fishing. Even for secondary industries like foundries.

Capital beats labour.

 

[suffolkowner]

100 years ago the farmer and his team of horses struggled to make a living off of a quarter section of 160 acres out west. Plowing "around 40 acres" wouldn't support a family. Now a farmer and his wife driving tractors, combines and trucks can manage a township - and need to to make a living.

The area of Saskatchewan is a lot more productive but won't support a larger population.

The reverse side of the productivity coin. Similar things could be said for Alberta and Manitoba, for mining and forestry and for fishing. Even for secondary industries like foundries.

Capital beats labour.

Saskatchewan is not a super attractive place in a lot of ways it just a viscious circle of not enough people to drive the economy thus not attracting more people. We remain tied to the greater US economy.

 

[CBH99]

Wedding cakes.

People want to save their wedding cake but they also want to eat it at the wedding. Can't eat it and save it.

40 years old, and I just understood that saying now... thanks guys

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Absolutely and they should be represented equally. High population density should not be dictating to low population density.

Actually, HT, it's the low density that is over represented in Canada. They don't want to have ridings that cover huge areas so the rural-low-density areas get more ridings per capita than urban high density ones.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Actually, HT, it's the low density that is over represented in Canada. They don't want to have ridings that cover huge areas so the rural-low-density areas get more ridings per capita than urban high density ones.

Sure. What ever makes you happy. I'm not really talking about an urban rural divide, that's a talking point others have espoused.

I will quote myself:

84 Seats Atlantic Region:
NFLD
PEI
NB
NS

*86 Seats Central Region:
Ont
Que

84 Seats Prairie/Pacific Region:
Man
Sask
AB
BC

84 Seats Northern Region:
Yuk
NWT
Nun

*I'm giving the decimal points to Central for population. And this should be reviewed every electoral cycle.

The regions have no office or individual representation they are just dividing lines on a map.

Those 84/86 seats are divided withing the individual regions.

Whatever is happening right now isn't working well.

And a split like that forces everyone to play together.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Except what you put in your "proposal" isn't based on "density" but on "regional" representation without proportionallity to population at all. You unilaterally define, for instance the Prairies/Pacific and Nothern Regions as having an existence that requires us to look at their density of population as a whole, but in "density" terms, there is no difference between the Vancouver/Northern BC divide and the Toronto/Northern Ontario one.

Your proposal may, or may not have validity as a regional representation system, but dont call it something based on "population density".

 

[FSTO]

Actually, HT, it's the low density that is over represented in Canada. They don't want to have ridings that cover huge areas so the rural-low-density areas get more ridings per capita than urban high density ones.

Yes rural areas have more seats per capita. That is countered by cabinet positions that are overwhelmingly populated by the heavy urban ridings. And in the ever more concentration of power within the cabal of the PMO that distinction is even more stark. Those rural seats could send in Labrador puppy for all the influence they have.