Help me Decide

It was Winston Churchill who said, “The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”

I awoke this morning with that quote in mind. As much as I try to avoid the process and panic of elections, they do intrude. Fortunately, we do not have the American system of the four-year cycle where the date of the election is known and the campaign timetable is set. They end up living in a routine of lame-duck, fight for what’s important, and then – success or failure – prepare for the next election. We don’t suffer that cycle. Thank goodness.

Instead, we have a very short period of for/against advertising, promises, name-calling, and speeches. Good. Get it over with.

I am not a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, conservative, new-democrat, green, Marxist or anything else. Right at this moment, I have no idea for whom I will vote. But, I am moved to write this because I believe – if I can believe what I hear and read – that the “average voter” thinks the economy is the number one issue and we need a change and I don’t know why that is the case.

If it is true that the economy is issue One and Change is necessary, then there must be an underlying belief that the government of the day can manipulate the economy and that the current government is not doing that manipulation as well as some other party will.

I see no evidence that the government of the day can manipulate the economy. The Canadian dollar is not falling; the US dollar is rising because the US is the safe-haven economy and there are huge problems in Europe, the UK, the Middle East, the Far East, and the southern hemisphere and all of that is beyond the reach of our government. Climate, and particularly drought, is not subject to legislation but it does affect food production and that affects food prices. The price of oil is not fixed in Parliament. Interest rates are not going significantly lower as a result of legislation, policy, or decree. The private sector and market forces will drive employment regardless of government – unless everyone works for the public sector.

If the average Canadian is pressured by the rising costs of daily living and looking for a promise of relief and if the individual Canadian is not going to get cost relief from the government, is there any way they can get income relief from the government?

It seems to me that most Canadians work for a wage, or earn a salary, or are business owners, or live on pension. Yes, some live on inheritances and some are receiving benefits. What can the government of the day do to improve the lot of wage earners, salary owners, business owners, and pensioners? With the caveat that whatever is done has no unintended consequences.

In my fifty years of working (my first job was 51 years ago and I am still working), I have done piecework, earned a wage (in union and non-union companies), earned a salary, owned a few businesses, and collected pensions. Each of those conditions has pros and cons.

My piecework experience was cyclical but the total amount I could earn was totally dependent upon my skill and effort. No government involvement there.

My non-union wage and union wage jobs were limited by the success of the business. Of the two, the union environment was better for me than the non-union environment – but I have known those who felt that the union was more trouble than it was worth. Regardless, there was no significant government involvement.

I have held salaried positions and in one case the position went away as a result of a government policy. But, generally, nothing the government could do would have made any difference to my salary or tenure.

The businesses I have owned were more affected by market forces than by any government legislation and although NAFTA was and still is a huge benefit to my business, not every business owner could say that.

If I were to learn from this life and make a plan for my second go-round in this world, I would absolutely choose to be Canadian and choose to be a business owner. And – perhaps more to the point of this current election – I would not make my voting choice on any belief that the government of the day can influence the economy in any significant way and certainly not on any presumption that change is somehow necessary. How could I make my voting decision?

I could take a very personal, local view and say I will vote for the local candidate – regardless of party – who will represent me. Someone who will take my issues over their own issues and facilitate my dealings with my federal government. That is not likely.

I could take a higher-level view and cast my vote for the party that I think will be best for me or for the country. Tough choice: best for me OR best for the country – but probably not both. But I can’t vote twice.

So, I have still not made a choice. I am, however, convinced that choosing on some belief that the government can change the economy or on some conviction that a change is necessary makes no sense.

Perhaps you can help me decide.