I feel like this is the most clear explanation I’ve seen so far - and I think they need to get this message out a lot better because I see a lot of confusion and misinformation about why this was called.

The federal NDP’s proposal to nationalize Stelco has me thinking about the broader case for public ownership. Which led me to this great piece from policyalternatives.ca on the disaster that CN’s privatization has been since Chrétien sold the crown corporation in 1995.

Preface: A bit about my perspective (Although I will try and keep things neutral as possible). I supported David Eby/BCNDP in regards to their housing actions (I wish they had doubled and tripled down on this space). I supported the actions to support vulnerable working demographics (I wish they had double and tripled down on this). I have been critical with Eby/BCNDP in regards to Environmental Policy - In particular I don't believe enough is being done to protect our Old-Growth Forests.

The debates so far are showing me that Eby is hearing the message because he is talking a lot about regulating the Fossil Fuel Industry and protecting the Environment. He is also obviously trying to win back people in the Labour Movement that felt alienated by some of the actions we have seen this last year.

The big question though is are people going to believe him in the grassroots that make up that NDP winning coalition. You need to get them to vote. Period.

Will he be able to inspire the youth like Emily Lowan of the BC Greens has been doing very well with a modern social media campaign (Throughout the NDP we need more of this. Lewis at Federal level was the first to kind of finally take our messaging into the current times during his successful leadership campaign).

What did you all think about the debates? :)

CBC didn't seem interested in uploading this segment to youtube for some reason...

This is honestly embarrassing.

Polling shows that Bradford has risen following Alexander's suspension of his campaign. Additionally, the advance voter turnout shows Eglinton Lawrence had the highest turnout, which is expected to be a Bradford-leaning ward.
Bradford's campaign has taken inspiration from Rob Ford; He wants to freeze property taxes, remove the land transfer tax, cut water bills, and massively increase the police budget, all without a credible plan for how he is going to pay for it. Well, his Rob Ford-style "independent line-by-line review of the budget" makes it clear how he is going to pay for it, he wants to pay for his expensive promises by cutting funding to the services people rely on, like the TTC, libraries, and parks. Toronto can't afford his slash-and-burn agenda.
On top of that, he is all in on data centres, and promises to use the undemocratic strong mayor powers to push through his policies even if city council disagrees because he doesn't respect dissenting opinions.
After failing to deliver any results to his own constituents in Beaches East York for 8 years, he is not up for the task of being mayor.
Make sure to vote and not let this grifter into office.

General discussion post:

I have been taking some International Politics and Economics courses while on parental leave.

My general question is how can the NDP provide its social programs, while not driving up the deficit too much and risking our credit rating. At the end of the day, we live in a globalized world, and will have to engage in the global market, at least in the short-term. That doesn't mean we couldn't accomplish a lot while working within the system.

Raising taxes is the most obvious answer, but what would that look like in practice?

The forms of taxation need to be popular with the public, otherwise the NDP would never survive more than one term.

I'm thinking increasing the corporate tax from 15% to maybe 18% (obviously raising it to more like 25% or 30% would feel good, but that would also likely just drive out business) which would generate billions in additional revenue. 18% would still make us competitive on the global market.

We should also end oil subsidies by gradually phasing them out. According to Environmental Defense Canada, we spend about 10.4 billion on oil subsidies each year (some sources say its closer to 30, others say closer to 4) and that would free up a lot of room in the budget. The smartest way to use that money would probably be through investments in retraining energy workers.

I think increasing the GST on cannabis and alcohol would be beneficial in the short term and generate significant revenue, although this would need to be implemented early into the term since it will be unpopular.

These are a couple ideas I had at the top of my head. I would love to hear from the rest of you!

I'm wondering if there was a time where a snap election called in a bid for more seats has ever really done what the premier/prime minister wanted. Eby's call for a snap election seems to have been received pretty badly overall and looks like it's going to backfire in one way or another. I've been looking at Trudeau's snap election in 2021 where it didn't necessarily backfire but he only gained 2 seats and no majority. What are the conditions that actually make something like this worth the gamble? Are there examples, Canadian or otherwise of a party benefitting hugely from a snap election?

He should not have called an election. Dude doesn’t even like campaigning. What a mess.

What are your thoughts on progress of making NDP a better party again. Do you think what has been going is helping to build the party? Why or why not?