‘What we are fundamentally all about’


Brian Topp considers equality.

Successive governments have turned their backs on the pursuit of equality using arguments that we now know to be false: that ever lower taxes and less government generate growth, that the unfettered growth of free markets will end poverty and “lift all boats,” and that social programs and economic rights make our economy non-competitive. These conservative truisms are not true. Strong social programs are a competitive advantage. A healthy, highly-educated workforce and modern infrastructure are the crucial ingredients of a strong economy and they must be funded collectively…

We can make better choices. We can respond to these changes and challenges. We can promote sustainable economic development and greater equality—in the mainstream of the industrialized world, as many other countries have chosen to do, by electing a modern, fiscally prudent,economically literate, socially progressive, determined, practical, future-focused social democratic government dedicated to addressing these issues with commitment and determination, one practical step at a time.


‘What we are fundamentally all about’

  1. Another ‘We can’ policyless podium to stand on.

    • Beats the hell out of the “They will” policyless podium that Steve stood on a few months ago.

      • By the next budget, it will be ‘Promises Kept’

  2. The usual load of la la land rubbish.  One fifth of the Canadian workforce are government workers – way too high.  Look what is happening in the UK – they will run out of money to pay benefits unless there are big tax hikes.  Public sector workers brain washed into thinking they set the bar for private sector so they must always demand more.

    • Gee. look what’s happened in good ol’ capitalist America.

      Now quit with the partisan slogans, and deal with reality.

    • Look what is happening in our Canadian auto industry,
      more unionized workers receiving retirement benefits than there are workers on the lines.

      • I have an old auntie who was a school teacher in Ontario – she is 106!!!!!!

  3. Thomas Sowell ~ Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it

    Arthur Laffer ~ The Spectator:
    This paradox — lower rates, but higher yield — has been demonstrated time and time again, the world over. Between 1980 and 2007, the US cut tax rates on every form of income, the highest, the lowest and all those in the middle. The result was that the rich paid more, even if their tax levels were reduced. Let’s take the top 1 per cent of earners. Over this 27-year period, their contribution to the income tax collected in America doubled from 19.5 per cent to 40 per cent. The same dynamics applied in Britain: when the top rate of income tax was lowered to 40 per cent in 1988, the share of income tax collected from the richest 1 per cent rose from 14 per cent then to 27 per cent last year.

    Foreign Affairs ~ Spreading The Wealth:
    The developing world can be divided into a “globalizing” group of countries that have seen rapid increases in trade and foreign investment over the last two decades — well above the rates for rich countries — and a “non-globalizing” group that trades even less of its income today than it did 20 years ago. The aggregate annual per capita growth rate of the globalizing group accelerated steadily from one percent in the 1960s to five percent in the 1990s. During that latter decade, in contrast, rich countries grew at two percent and non-globalizers at only one percent.

    Wiki ~ USSR:
    By 1970, the Soviet economy had reached its zenith and was estimated at about 60 per cent of the size of the USA in terms of the estimated commodities (like steel and coal). In 1989, the GDP of the Soviet Union was $2,500 Billion while the GDP of the United States was $4,862 Billion with per capita income figures as $8,700 and $19,800 respectively.

  4. There is a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome, something that socialists like Topp fail to understand. But he can do his part by bowing out of the leadership race, considering there can be only one leader, contradicting his desire for equality of outcome.

Sign in to comment.