So what is there to say today? We’re back with Premier Dad, who lied to us, and cheated us, but you know, we didn’t know the other guy, so, you know, we went with him. Great. Get ready for some more taxes, folks!
I do not want to come off as a sore loser, because I hate that, I hated that the last federal election when all the lefties were sore losers, and are still talking about the “60% that didn’t vote for them”. I do not want to do that. The people of Ontario voted for the Liberals, they won fair and square according to the system we have, and we have to accept that. What I am wondering, though, is HOW it came to be.
The Seinfeld Campaign.
Let’s face it: the campaign was about NOTHING. I mean, come on, taking HST off of Hydro? What’s that, like $20 a month? A $1,500 tax credit for seniors so they can renovate their homes? Really? How much money does a $1,500 tax credit give you in your pocket, like $200? Oh, you can do a lot of renovating for $200. Ever been to the Home Depot and picked up some wood? $200 doesn’t even begin to pay the taxes! And I don’t even know what the NDP was offering, oh yes, a cap on gas prices. Really? And what else was there in the platforms… More tax-credits for some group or another. I mean, really, what was this campaign about? It was about piddly things. Things that don’t matter. “We’re for familes!”, “No, WE are for families!”, “No, WE are!”. Come on. Where are the bold ideas, like tackling the deficit in a meaningful way, like not just extending the credit limit, but paying off your balance. Tax reform that will simplify the system and make it more equal, like a flat tax system, where everyone pays a fixed percentage of their income, no longer stifling entrepreneurship. Fix healthcare once and for all by allowing a private delivery system, paid for with your OHIP card, that will take the strain off of our hospitals. Come up with a doable, affordable energy policy, like waste-to-energy, which kills two birds with one stone. Tackle pollution, and really punish the ones breaking the law. No, we’re talking about $20 a month off your hydro bill, a once a year $200 payment to be able to renovate your house, and capping your gas price at $1.20 a litre. Whoop-de-doo. So what do most people do when there is a choice between three parties that are the same? They go with the status quo. That’s Human Nature.
In a way, the result reflects today’s parenting style: even though little Johnny put spray-paint all over the neighbour’s wall, we praise him for the nice artwork, apologize to the neighbor, but forgo the punishment, in order to secure Johnny’s friendship. And therein lies the problem: even when talking about prisons, the words “rehabilitation” and “deterrent” come up, yet the word “punishment” is never uttered. We live in a society where “keeping the peace” and “keep it slow and steady” is more important than making people face the consequences of their actions. What does that say about our society? We all ran to the comforting safety of Daddy, even though you know Daddy is a lying, cheating bastard. That’s OK. He’s Daddy, he’ll take care of us. We forgive him his past lies, and will go “forward” with him.
I have a real axe to grind with the media, especially the “news”. I put “news” in quotes, because, for some reason, and I don’t know when this changed, the “news” is no longer just the news, it is a nightly opinion-piece. Thirty years ago, the news was just the news. The (boringish) anchor was sitting in front of a (boringish) set, just reading the news: “In Ottawa, the government passed a bill that makes it illegal to shoot someone”. You know, the NEWS. Now it’s an opinion piece, and every anchor and correspondent has to throw in their two cents worth. And don’t even get me started on the newspapers, which should be reclassified as opinion magazines, like MacLeans. And I have heard many time before “oh, I stopped following the news, I get my own information”, well that’s fine for you, but unfortunately the masses still watch the “news” on TV, or read it in the newspapers, and take it for “news”, rather than the opinion of the anchor or editor that it really is.
All of a sudden, the week before the election the media started talking about “the coming storm” referencing a new recession. Even though Canada’s finance minister has not talked about a coming recession, nor has the Bank of Canada, but there it was. So where did it come from? It came from Dalton McGuinty’s mouth: “the coming storm, and we need an experienced leader to weather it”. And there you go. This is how the “news” influences the voter.
Polls are no good for anything. Really. They influence the people that like to follow the crowd, which seems to be the majority of people. The “Orange Crush” syndrome: people that want to be a part of history, rather than vote with their convictions. You can make an argument that a poll can also motivate the troops if your party is behind, but that is just the point: on election day, we only start counting votes after all polling stations are closed, in order not to influence the polls that close later, yet we allow polls to be done and published, that constantly influence the outcome all through the campaign. But does this blindly following the polls say something about polling, or something about us?
People 1) don’t care, 2) are selfish and 3) stupid
- And this is the kicker: people don’t care. One the one hand, they say they don’t care about politics, and don’t vote, because “They are all the same. They all lie and cheat to get elected”, and on the other, they keep re-electing proven liars. If there is no punishment for the crime, the politician will just keep on lying, and keep on getting re-elected. We’re creating our own prophecy here.
- People will vote for what will be good for them, rather than what is good for us all. That is also Human Nature. Promise someone a $100 tax credit, “oh, that’s better than paying off the provincial debt, I get $100!”.
- A $100 tax credit, is NOT $100 in your pocket people!! Come on!
So what to think of all this? At the end of the day, after all is said and done, democracy prevailed, the majority got their choice, and at the very least, we have to be happy about THAT.
I am just wondering if the founding fathers of democracy ever thought of the fact that the people who vote are uninterested, ill informed, selfish followers who have no concept of “the greater good”.