CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › For the Canadians: EI reform OR possible election?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

For the Canadians: EI reform OR possible election?

post #1 of 36
5/25/09 at 12:52pm
Thread Starter 
So the Liberals wanna reform EI, which I'm all for, but I'm not sure if I agree with LOWERING the amount of hours you had to have worked. I don't have a great understanding of what they wanna do but it seems like they want to make it easier to collect EI? The system is abused enough already so couldn't this lead to more abuse?

And if it's not passed/accepted (whatever) then the Liberals and NDP (I believe) are more then willing to call an election. But if an election is called wouldn't this put a temporary freeze on all the money the Conservative wanted to hand out to help "stabilize the economy"? So wouldn't this just piss off regular ol'Joe Canuck and make them hate the Liberals? Giving the Liberals MORE embarrassment and the Conservatives more power?

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this.
Reply
post #2 of 36
5/25/09 at 8:05pm
So we all must suffer? Because you aren't lucky enough to work seasonally? That would be nice. I know I would do it.
Reply
post #3 of 36
5/26/09 at 11:45pm
no one on seasonal wants to go on EI, you just need to be able to eat because of our climate.
Reply
post #4 of 36
5/27/09 at 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordelsey View Post
no one on seasonal wants to go on EI, you just need to be able to eat because of our climate.
Or you need to find a second type of work for the winter. If you have one seasonal job, get a second one for the opposing season.
Reply
post #5 of 36
5/27/09 at 9:36pm
It's hardly worth bringing the government to a halt over, though.
Reply
post #6 of 36
5/27/09 at 10:28pm
And actually, there is a point to be made about the expectation of everyone being able to work a full-time job being unrealistic in todays environment of 40+ hours per week jobs, since there just isnt enough work around.

Same problem exists here in europe, basically people are too productive, but dont want to let go of their 40-50 work hours.
Just as the devils advocate
Reply
post #7 of 36
5/28/09 at 1:45am
Thread Starter 
I can understand being on EI if you lost your job because of the economy. That makes sense. And anyone who works pays into EI, which is good. I've never claimed it and I hope I never do but like any insurance you pay it because IN CASE something happens you know you get something in return.

But there are people who abuse it, big time. Whether yes, they ONLY work a seasonal job and then live off of it the rest of the time or the people who work just enough hours to still be able to claim it.

I don't believe the Liberals need to threaten an election with this. They need to get tougher with the Conservatives planned spending packages to help stabilize the economy (which Harper said by the way that Canada wasn't in an economic problem even though we were) and follow through on their threat of holding the Cons accountable if they don't spend what they said they were going to and where they were going to. THAT is what they should threaten an election for. Not EI. The EI issue is important due to current circumstances but not "let's topple the government and call an election" worthy.
Reply
post #8 of 36
5/28/09 at 4:29pm
What percentage of the working population is seasonal/temporary that relies on the limits?

More importantly, I suspect that the size of this group as a part of the economy is quite small, even relative to the number of folks who are off work due to the current recession.

Without personal experience (or the energy to look these things up), I wonder how much it costs for those who're ineligible for EI or unable to meet their needs with it to go on welfare plus other forms of assistance and how far back that removes them from productively contributing to the economy?

BTW, is it wrong that I read the title as "EI reform OR possible erection?"
Reply
post #9 of 36
5/28/09 at 5:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy n View Post
Sigh....the point is they DON'T want to work all year. They work just enough to meet the requirements for EI and then gladly sit on the couch until it runs out...then repeat...ad nauseam.

That's why the system is fucked.
I'd like to see some stats that show how many people there are that do this. I lived in a ski resort town in the interior of BC and the seasonal staff often had off-season work ie) golf courses, restaurants, city gigs. What EI did for them was allow them to live for the one to two months that occur in transition. Sure, there was abuse but not so much that it was worth destroying the majority to get at the minority.
Reply
post #10 of 36
6/3/09 at 4:51pm
Thread Starter 
Hahahhaa:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/...ft-ctv317.html

How many times can his people leave "sensitive" documents lying around before the population gets pissed off? Even if these aren't huge, major, top secret type files that could rock the foundations of the country, they're still labeled "secret", "classified" and "sensitive" for a reason.
Reply
post #11 of 36
6/5/09 at 4:05am
Ok -- it's late at night and I'm avoiding work.

However, I'm still not going to pay CANSIM for the latest data nor am I going to put it through the ringer myself, i.e., lazy and cheap.

Here's a study done by STATSCAN with data up until 2001, Seasonal work and Employment Insurance use.

Quote:
Long-term seasonal workers are defined as persons aged 18 to 59 in 1993 who were not full-time students at any point during the 1993-1998 period and who had at least three paid-job (or self-employed in fishing) spells ending within the same three-month 'off-season' over the five-year period 1993-1997 or 1994-1998. Jobs could not last more than nine months. With this 'mechanical' definition of seasonal work, 4.4% of all employees and self-employed fishers were seasonal workers over the six-year period.

If I were truly inspired not to do the work in front of me, I'd dig through the data to figure out what portion of GDP these people accounted for.

Quote:
To determine the relationship between seasonal work interruptions and reliance on EI, SLID respondents were classified as seasonal workers if they had three unemployment spells occurring in the same 'off-season' in either the 1993-1997 or the 1994-1998 period. A job spell was associated with an EI spell if the individual received EI benefits within three months following the end of the job spell.
More than one-sixth (17.3%) of long-term seasonal workers did not receive EI benefits following any of their three seasonal job spells. In total, about 61% of seasonal jobs were followed by EI. (The EI Coverage Survey found EI use to be 61% among workers who identified their last job as seasonal.)
Reply
post #12 of 36
6/5/09 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy n View Post
But isn't the fact that people can essentially get a paid vacation over the winter show that there's a problem with the system that should be looked at?
Maybe I'm missing something but these people I mentioned aren't getting a paid vacation. They work during the ski season and then during transition from ski-lifts-closed to summer tourist season collect EI until their summer jobs are available.

I'm also not saying there isn't an issue with people abusing the system but is it actually high enough to screw over people who do work in seasonal jobs in seasonal communities? Some one has to work in tourist towns so what do they do in between highs spots in the tourist seasons. It's crazy expensive to live in places like Whistler, Banff, Jasper, Kelowna and Kimberley so they need some sort of income.

It's also not like these jobs pay enough that savings are a possibility. Some do manage to do all right but most barely live hand-to-mouth in high season let alone low season.
Reply
post #13 of 36
6/5/09 at 2:27pm
Whatever the system, someone's going to work out how to abuse it, anywhere there's free money there's a scam.

I can see there being an arguement for being more generous with EI when the economy is still sliding, there's more genuine claims - and it will truly help people.

This discussion over a few months here and there for seasonal workers is ridiculous - if any one of us was in that position we would do the same thing -surely this is what EI was designed for.

You want to see benefit scrounging look at the bastards in the UK - that shit will blow your mind.
Reply
post #14 of 36
6/7/09 at 1:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy n View Post
I agree. I would never want to get rid of EI, there's a glitch in the system that allows "some" to work for a few months and then live off of EI for the rest of the year. As for savings well my old roommate who was a pro at this worked for the city during the spring and summer and then took the fall and winter off....every year...and he was a home owner, so Ryan he was doing just fine. He knew he was abusing the system and didn't give a shit.

The glitch that allows this is what I feel needs to be looked at.
Absolutely he needs to be nailed to a wall but how do you do that without hurting people who actually need EI? Sadly, sometimes you have to let idiots like that get the best of the system so you can help those who truly need it. If he's happy in his life of being a pariah on society it says more about him then it does about society.
Reply
post #15 of 36
9/8/09 at 7:40pm
Thread Starter 
So... time will tell shortly if we're headed to the polls again. The Liberals are going to vote against the Conservatives in a "no-confidence" vote soon and it appears the Bloc could follow suit. I guess it's up to the NDP to sway it either way.

I don't think Harper would be voted out by Canadians (since we seem to be afraid of change for some reason) but I say its enough of this cabinets idiocy. Harper never wants to listen to anyone, he won't budge on certain issues, his cabinet members and MP's always seem to get in trouble for something and nothing happens. The constant lies and mis-truths and this Home Reno Tax credit that's not even passed yet. That's some good politicking right there.
Reply
post #16 of 36
9/14/09 at 1:21pm
I don't think so Anymore. After last Fridays statements made by Ignatieff, that he wouldn't partake in a coalition with NDP or the Bloc, I started to think that he may be painting himself in a corner. He has no chance of governing without one.
Reply
post #17 of 36
10/2/09 at 12:11am
Thread Starter 
No election! http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/...nt-ndp305.html

Not much of a shocker. Once the NDP said they'd back the Conservatives I knew nothing was going to happen.

The Rick Mercer Report is back he had two great bits:

The Slap Chop

Rick's rant on no election and how Iggy should get tough

The Slap Chop bit is great because it's so true. It doesn't seem to matter how many elections are called... the Conservatives will keep getting the minority government.

I think Iggy just needs to simmer down a bit. Wait awhile. Get a little tougher and re-group the Liberal party and form an actual platform. He's all over the place. One week its this, next week its that. Get some issues, get ideas and stand behind them. And then fight like Hell in Parliament to get things changed.

Start getting tough on the Conservatives too. He just needs to do something.
Reply
post #18 of 36
12/31/09 at 11:33am
Thread Starter 
So Harper's trying to prorogue parliament again. What the fuck? I want this guy out of office. Though when I think about it's not like the Liberal party would really be any better suited since they have no idea what they're doing or what they even stand for but damn.... ARGH!!!
Reply
post #19 of 36
12/31/09 at 1:53pm
A muskrat would be a better leader than this piece of shit. If you vote or voted Harper, you're a dumbfuck that deserves to die, along with your children. It not even up for debate. This piece of shit is singlehandedly destroying 100+ years of Canadian reputation and ethics. He's turning politics into what the US are. All about appearances, with no substance at all.
Reply
post #20 of 36
12/31/09 at 8:39pm
Yea i'm really pissed about this Proroguing. I can't believe (Even after calling the Chretien Liberals out on doing the same thing) he'd pull this shit two years in a row. That hasn't happened since the 60s with Trudeu.

I'm actually going to write my member of parliment over this bullshit. Just cause they dont' wanna have to deal with this Afgan torture and think its going to blow over during the olympics.

Fuck you harper..Fuck you in your stupid ass!
Reply
post #21 of 36
1/1/10 at 2:31pm
Thread Starter 
This a good little article on possibly why Harper is proroguing again. Though I already knew all this it just helps flesh it out:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/...vp-newman.html

Quote:
Setting the stage for a spring election

Last Updated: Thursday, December 31, 2009 | 4:46 PM ET
By Don Newman, special to CBC News

Get ready for a spring election.

That is phase two of Stephen Harper's newest plan to try and secure a majority government.

Phase one came this week, when for the second time in just over a year, he asked Governor General Michaëlle Jean to prorogue Parliament and schedule a new session for March 3.

Last year at this time, Harper had to go cap in hand to the Governor General asking her to end the first session of the 40th Parliament only weeks after it had begun and less than two months after the election that returned him to power with his second minority government.

He was forced to do that because of a horrific miscalculation he had made at the time — the plan to end public funding for political parties and so bankrupt his political opponents.

So upset were those opponents that they cobbled together a coalition to take down the government on a vote of confidence and so replace the Conservatives without an election.

To save himself, Harper had to convince the Governor General to suspend Parliament, to allow him to buy time, backtrack on the election-financing plan and build the political base against the proposed coalition.

Remove the platform

This year he has made another calculation.

If Parliament returned as first planned on January 25, his administration would again be under fire over how much it knew about the torturing of Afghan detainees by the government in Kabul.

He also knew that, with a budget to be delivered on March 4, all those previous weeks in the House of Commons would have been filled with opposition suggestions for what to put in it.

That these suggestions might well be impractical, even irresponsible, goes without saying.

They would likely be politically popular and there was no good reason, from the government's point of view, to let the opposition parties get away with that.

Opposition parties usually do better when the Commons is in session and the government under fire.

When he first came to Ottawa as a member of the Reform party, Harper was all about the supremacy of parliament and the importance of MPs.

He held that view all the way through his time as leader of the Canadian Alliance and then the Conservative party. All the time, that is, when he was in opposition.

Choose your backdrop

But once he came to power in 2006, his views began to change. And the longer in power, it seems, the more they changed.

MPs became a nuisance. So the ones in his own party, even in his cabinet, were told to be quiet.

He couldn't do that with the other three parties, so he tried to ignore them.

In fact, he tries to ignore Parliament as much as possible, even when it comes to giving the economic updates he is mandated to by a resolution of the House.

He doesn't like to unveil them in Ottawa, where the opposition are assembled. Instead he delivers them in front of partisan Conservative audiences who cheer him on.

Going for the gold

This year, Harper he didn't go cap in hand to the Governor General. According to the reports, he just telephoned.

With that call and her agreement, he sacrificed half of the legislation his government introduced in 2009, the half that has not yet been passed.

A small price to pay, apparently, for silencing embarrassing questions on Afghanistan, the budget or any number of other issues.

Instead the game plan is to keep Parliament quiet while the Vancouver Olympics are on and hope Canadian athletes do well in the medal parade.

By their own internal logic, Conservative strategists think gold medals by the men's and women's hockey teams in particular will translate into that kind of feel-good moment that will lead to a majority government.

Of course these are the same strategists who thought that having Barack Obama come to Ottawa last February would replenish the Harper image, which had been tarnished by last year's proroguing of the House.

But who knows, maybe they are right. For no logical reason, Harper's image and approval ratings both were enhanced when he surprised everyone by playing the piano and singing a Beatles song on the stage of the National Arts Centre a few months ago.

The Olympics are a much bigger stage and if they go well, look for Harper and the Conservatives to try and find a way to provoke an election this spring. That's phase two of the plan.
Reply
post #22 of 36
1/1/10 at 6:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan View Post
So Harper's trying to prorogue parliament again. What the fuck? I want this guy out of office. Though when I think about it's not like the Liberal party would really be any better suited since they have no idea what they're doing or what they even stand for but damn.... ARGH!!!
Psst. There's a third party. Also a fourth and fifth, even if they aren't as feasible.
Reply
post #23 of 36
1/2/10 at 2:47am
It's typical Canadian politics, as long as there's no clear winner the Canadian generally wins, or at least things aren't made much worse for him or her.
Reply
post #24 of 36
1/2/10 at 10:54am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post
Psst. There's a third party. Also a fourth and fifth, even if they aren't as feasible.
I'm aware we have five parties to choose from. But the Bloc party would never get elected to lead the country and neither would the Green Party. That leaves the Liberal and NDP parties. While I don't entirely hate Jack Layton, I'm not sure how I would feel with him leading the country.
Reply
post #25 of 36
1/2/10 at 3:41pm
The problem with the NDP is that, outside of Manitoba, they have bankrupted or finanically destablized the provinces they have had control over. Layton has some great ideas and I would fully support him if he could become alittle more fiscally conservative
Reply
post #26 of 36
1/7/10 at 7:04pm
Just reading the lame excuses from Harper about proroguing, etc.

Am I the only one that feels we're living a realtime version of Aguirre, the Wrath of God?
Reply
post #27 of 36
1/7/10 at 10:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Jarvie View Post
The problem with the NDP is that, outside of Manitoba, they have bankrupted or finanically destablized the provinces they have had control over. Layton has some great ideas and I would fully support him if he could become alittle more fiscally conservative
Saskatchewan went from decades of being a have not province to a have province under the NDP. The situation in BC got no worse under the NDP but much worse under the Liberals. And, as you well know, the PCs have pretty much destroyed Alberta unless you're a CEO or work in the Oil and Gas industry. I'd say financially conservative is not necessarily the answer.

ETA: I'd also like to point out that the Bloc are a bunch of leftie freaks and they do okay with the finances in Quebec.
Reply
post #28 of 36
1/7/10 at 10:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan S~ View Post
And, as you well know, the PCs have pretty much destroyed Alberta unless you're a CEO or work in the Oil and Gas industry.
Just wait until this Wildrose Alliance Party gets their mitts on it. She quoted Reagan. We're so screwed.
Reply
post #29 of 36
1/8/10 at 12:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
Just wait until this Wildrose Alliance Party gets their mitts on it. She quoted Reagan. We're so screwed.
My neighbour to the south is a Conservative voter (despite that, he's a nice guy) and he's even scared of the WRA party. They fucking terrify me. I'm hoping Nixey or Werewolf Girl has space for two adults and a two year old in Vancouver if WRA win.
Reply
post #30 of 36
1/8/10 at 5:18am
Sask became a Have province because they finally are getting all there natural resources mined like crazy. Its going to do the same thing Alberta did, explode upward then come down again (not anytime soon but you know)

Alberta and the WRA party also scare the shit outta me. If this province goes anymore right wing i'm the fuck outta here
Reply
post #31 of 36
1/8/10 at 1:00pm
Yeah, I'm not planning a move, but for the first time I've given serious thought to where, if I was planning a move, I would go.
Reply
post #32 of 36
1/8/10 at 1:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunwukong View Post
Just reading the lame excuses from Harper about proroguing, etc.

Am I the only one that feels we're living a realtime version of Aguirre, the Wrath of God?
What's insane about Harper becoming more and more of a dictator (I'm exagerating a little here) is that he's done all of this with a minority government. The opposition is so weak it sickens me and it's why the Bloc Québécois has lost my support since 2007 or 2008.
Reply
post #33 of 36
1/8/10 at 4:13pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Alexor View Post
What's insane about Harper becoming more and more of a dictator (I'm exagerating a little here) is that he's done all of this with a minority government. The opposition is so weak it sickens me and it's why the Bloc Québécois has lost my support since 2007 or 2008.
Well obviously they can get away with all this when the previous Liberal leader was a twit and the rest of the parties can't form a backbone. Harper and his party seem like the bullies who got in charge over the nerds and just laughing their asses off doing whatever they want.

And now you got Iggy who just talks and talks but doesn't actually seem to stand for anything. I support the Liberal party. I've supported them ever since I turned voting age but God damn.... get yourselves together and create a damn plan. It's taken them this long to FINALLY figure out that they need a platform?

The faux ad on the Rick Mercer Report for the "Liberal GPS'" was right: "Liberal Party of Canada - Going Nowhere with Confidence".

Ugh... just a few more years and Trudeau Jr. will be in charge.
Reply
post #34 of 36
1/8/10 at 4:22pm
It's quite sad, really. And I slowly turned my family from die-hard Bloc voters to NDP. Why? Because the Bloc doesn't do shit for Canada. If Quebec wants the separate, then vote for the Parti Quebecois in the provincials. If not, the Bloc is a non-entity in a federal government.
Reply
post #35 of 36
1/8/10 at 11:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Jarvie View Post
Sask became a Have province because they finally are getting all there natural resources mined like crazy. Its going to do the same thing Alberta did, explode upward then come down again (not anytime soon but you know)
That's part of it. But they also did a hugely successful appeal to expats living in Alberta and BC to come back home. They stopped the brain drain. They made sure their economy is based on a bunch of different industries rather than just one. Education became a priority. There were a lot of small moves made by the NDs that made Sask a much better place than it was.
Reply
post #36 of 36
1/9/10 at 3:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendan View Post
Ugh... just a few more years and Trudeau Jr. will be in charge.
The horror.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › For the Canadians: EI reform OR possible election?