• Archangel@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    13 hours ago

    The NDP has basically become indistinguishable from the Liberal party. And if there really isn’t any difference between them, then why would people keep voting for the one least likely to win? It’s redundant.

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Did we collectively forget that the NDP brought dental care to those who couldn’t otherwise afford it? Kinda a big difference, no? The Liberals certainly wouldn’t have done it themselves.

      It seems more just that the optics of confidence and supply is confusing to some.

      • DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        It’s such a liberal thing to do it based on income instead of it being universal. I still haven’t heard a good reason.

      • toastmeister@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        If they funded it with taxes I would give them props. Future austerity with interest is an unsustainable program used only to drive short term votes, and is nothing like our universal healthcare, which was fully funded from the start so that it lasts.

      • Archangel@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Dental care that only a fraction of the population even qualify for? Meanwhile the rest of us are still dependent on our employers to provide us with private insurance that covers less and less every year.

        I’m old enough to remember when the NDP was Canada’s workers party. They barely even pay that legacy lip-service now.

        • enkers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          While yes it’s technically a fraction, and universal would’ve been better, the 4 in 5 people that make under 90k is a pretty darn big fraction.

          • Archangel@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Lol! You also can’t have access to any other form of dental care. And since most employers offer a bare minimum of coverage, that eliminates nearly everyone who is currently employed.

            • enkers@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              OK, and now that a system is in place, they have a financial incentive to drop that coverage because it A) costs them money, and B) costs their workers money, so it makes no sense to keep it there.

    • ToffeeIsForClosers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 hours ago

      That could be part of the calculation.

      The irony of this is that propping up the Liberals in the previous term was supposed to pull the focus Left to progressive policies and bring legitimacy to the NDP as a party that is able to govern.

      They succeeded on the first but have apparently failed on the second to the point where the Liberals have gotten all the credit (or blame, depending on your point of view).

      Now we’re all set to see the same movie in this term.

      It might not be clear on what are Carney’s intentions vs the backroom bargains that will be required for the NDP support this time around. But if he surrounds himself with the old Liberal guard as Trudeau did, I would encourage everyone to remember that the Liberal party has a very long history of saying one thing and doing another and that other thing isn’t always in the collective best interests of Canadians. This is why I don’t mind the dependency on the NDP.