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.
this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
56 points (96.7% liked)
Canada
9607 readers
1335 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
- Calgary (AB)
- Comox Valley (BC)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Windsor (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- Montréal Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
💻 Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Buy Canadian
- Quebec Finance
- Churning Canada
🗣️ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
🍁 Social / Culture
- Ask a Canadian
- Bières Québec
- Canada Francais
- First Nations
- First Nations Languages
- Give'r Gaming (gaming)
- Indigenous
- Inuit
- Logiciels libres au Québec
- Maple Music (music)
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
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.
While I agree universal would've been better, the cutoff is 90k. That's something like 80% of the population who qualify, and the top 20% can probably afford it.
In practice, is it really that different than universal with a raise in taxes on the wealthiest 20%?
90k isn't the wealthiest 20%.....
EDIT I stand corrected https://www.statista.com/statistics/484838/income-distribution-in-canada-by-income-level/
But still waiting for an actual good reason.
And not to mention the drug plan only covers 2 types of drugs.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Labour movement has been politically dead in Canada for a long time.