Buckdog

Awesome! According to this, 59% of the population are the same or better off!!! Your statistics are useless. Its all in the eye of the beholder!

Wow Angus .. there's an example of Tory math if there ever was one! 38% clearly state they are worse off. 29% are no better despite all of the bloody Right wing propaganda and Billions spent by Harper over the last 5 years. If you are proud of that, then you are blinded by your 'harperism' .. nice try!

Leftdog,
It looks like you are a "glass is half empty" kind of guy. 30 plus 29 is 59 in anybody's math, so we can deduce that 59% of those who responded are NOT worse off. That's 21% more than those who say they are!
The numbers can be spun however you or I want. That chart (which isn't even mentioned in the article, because the two are totally on different subjects)is meaningless to people who can think for themselves. Who asked the question? To whom was the question asked? How valid was the sample? WHEN was the question asked? When (and where) was it originally published?
C'mon. Really? You expect people to read and agree with that?
It just looks like cheap "left wing" propoganda to me.

LOL .. more Tory math??? Let's see - Mulroney bankrupted the country (a Conservative) - Grant Devine bankrupted Saskatchewan (a Conservative) - Harper is bankrupting Canada (with the largest deficits in our histroy ... Billions for the corporate rich) ... and yet .. he claims to be a 'fiscal' Conservative.

Your boy is toast!

Ok,
#1 He is not "my boy". That is just condescending and arrogant. (Typical old school left)
And with no real alternative on the horizon, I would doubt that he is "toast".
#2 If you check the FACTS (which you have seem to have trouble accepting) you will see that Brian Mulroney DID NOT BANKRUPT Canada. Grant Devine DID NOT BANKRUPT Saskatchewan. And how did they enter the conversation, anyway? (More typical old school left. Can't answer original question or comment, so deflect by stating an opinion and claiming it as fact.)
#3 Harper, is not Bankrupting Canada by "giving" Billions to the Corporate Rich. Where do you get your facts?
If you would intelligently debate my comments, with actual facts, I would be thrilled to engage. If you keep reaching into the "old bag of tricks" I am just going to keep pointing them out to my friends from all ends of the spectrum.

More Right wing propaganda my friend .. you Tories are masters at the myth of your so called 'fiscal conservatism' ....

1) Mulroney:
Mulroney's inability to improve the government's finances, as well as his use of tax increases to deal with it, were major factors in alienating the western conservative portion of his power base. At the same time, the Bank of Canada began to raise interest rates in order to meet a zero inflation target; the experiment was regarded as a failure that exacerbated the effect of the recession in Canada. Annual budget deficits ballooned to record levels, reaching $42 billion in his last year of office. These deficits grew the national debt dangerously close to the psychological benchmark of 100% of GDP, further weakening the Canadian dollar and damaging Canada's international credit rating.

2) Harper:
According to the OECD, Canada’s debt ratio in 2010 was actually 3rd in the G7 (Germany and the UK were better than Canada). Canada has a record $56-billion deficit under Stephen Harper, who drove Canada into deficit even before the recession.

The balanced budgets of the early Harper years, therefore, were the legacy of what they inherited rather than anything they did themselves. As promised, they cut taxes; but they let spending rip, something they were able to do because they’d inherited a surplus. They let spending rip by creating new programs, adding money to existing ones, buying into the mythology of the “fiscal imbalance” and transferring billions to provinces, and poking holes in the tax system through a series of tax expenditures.

Now, however, the federal budget is seriously in deficit. But this ostensibly conservative government seems in no hurry to rectify the situation. Even the government’s five-year time frame for the deficit’s elimination seems too optimistic, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

To this point, the Harperites have been much like conservatives everywhere. They’ve cut taxes but let spending rise in real terms and balanced the books only because of what they’d inherited. There’s every chance Mr. Harper won’t be in office the next time Ottawa shows a surplus.

3) Grant Devine:
Provincially, it’s been much the same story. In Ontario, the Harris-Eves Conservatives cut taxes and left a big deficit. In Saskatchewan, the Grant Devine Conservatives left a fiscal hole for the subsequent NDP government with a $14 Billion debt on the shoulders of Saskatchewan's 1 million citizens. In Alberta, the Conservatives cut taxes, but spending kept rising, so Alberta has one of the largest per capita governments in Canada. Only resource revenues let the government show surpluses. Once the recession came, the government dipped into the sustainability fund to help with shortfalls.

Since this time machine is taking us back 25 years, (another old school left technique --- look back, not forward) I will point out that the NDP were not forthcoming about the books prior to losing the election to Devine's conservatives. And since we are digging through,don't forget that Lorne Calvert also sucked when it came to the provincial economy. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of young people from Saskatchewan moved to Alberta... $37 Million wasted in the Spudco deal, and that doesn't include those who lost their family farms, or their life savings after being misled by the New Democrats. That, my friend, is real damage.
I would love to bring up the record of Federal New Democrats in power, but the Canadian public has had the sense to never elect them. The only reason the NDP get re-elected so often in Saskatchewan is because of skill they have at running election campaigns and turning votes into seats. I seem to remember that Romanow and Calvert both won the Province with less than half of the popular vote. Whatever.

Governments suck no matter who is in charge. (Except this Brad Wall fellow, he seems to be doing well!)

And none of this has anything to do with the original point of the post. The graph you put on your blog is still irrelevant. Period.

#1) "taking us back 25 years, (another old school left technique --- look back, not forward)" HUH!? Haven't you just described what the Right & Harper are all about? You know .. conserving archaic economic ideology like 'fiscal conservatism' .. 'trickle down theory' .. 'cut taxes for the Rich and everyone will prosper'!

#2) Grant Devine had 9 consecutive deficit budgets & borrowed billions to create a false agricultural economy with a disastrous program called GRIP. It subsidized the Conservatives rural farm base with billions of borrowed dollars - eventually running the total provincial debt up to an amount equal to the value of the province's Crown Corporation holdings. In other words a strategic bankrupting of the province.

#3) There is no moral equivalency between a $37 Million project and policies that led to $14 Billion borrowed dollars. Grant Devine told NY investors that "Saskatchewan has so much going for it you can afford to mismanage it and STILL break even).

#4) "The only reason the NDP get re-elected so often in Saskatchewan is because of skill they have at running election campaigns and turning votes into seats." .. The Saskatchewan Party better be ready for a big shock on election day. They were convinced they had it in the bag in 1999 but they were defeated. Next, they were absolutely convinced that 2003 was theirs for sure .. not so much. They took another big defeat.

By 2007 the New Dems had been in power for 4 terms .. 16 years and still they held onto 20 some seats and a sizable Opposition. Tory staff and pundits were convinced that the New Dems would be reduced to single digit seats. Nope. Over 20.

#5) "Except this Brad Wall fellow"!! HUH! Laughing Out Loud!! Please .. you call that statement 'cover'!! LOL

And still, you refuse to accept the fact that the original point, your graph, is still all just smoke and mirrors and lacks substance. But you rely on that faulty thinking.

You can look backwards, or you can look forward. We will never agree. I choose to learn from the past, and look to the future. You just want to be frozen in past so that our children can move away for greater opportunities. They are moving BACK here now since the SP took over. It is not a coincidence.

Look around the province at the economic activity. By looking around Saskatoon, Regina, Moose Jaw, Yorkton, Estevan etc., it sure doesn't look like their needs to be a revolution of any sorts. Their are issues that need to be dealt with, for sure. But this positive climate in this province had been absent for decades. You can claim "moral superiority", but I don't buy it. There are as many honest, hard working, dedicated people on the right as there are on the left.

My last comment, ever, on your blog is that you may be suprised to know that I am a member of the publice service, who is forced to be in a union. It is not a choice. (It pains me knowing that a portion of my monthly earnings go the New Dems in this province). You would likely be suprised how many "brothers and sisters" feel the same way as I do!