Talk:Tim Hudak

message: I realize this is a general question, but I'm asking it now because time is of the essence, I think, since an election is in the works in Ontario.  The current image of Tim Hudak isn't the best portrait, particularly with the superimposed blue background.  Although my photos are a bit grainy, I have just uploaded six portraits of Mr. Hudak, any of which I believe would be an improvement.  I don't wish to break the Wikimedia Commons rules, nor do I wish to offend anyone. Thanks for any assistance.  Laurel L. Russwurm 02:52, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the policy/procedure for replacing Infobox portrait images?

message: Perhaps we should take this discussion to the Canadian discussion board, rather than getting caught in a revert war.  
Until then: the term "right wing" is commonly used on Wikipedia, including on the Conservative Party of Canada page.  I don't think anyone would seriously dispute that Hudak is on the right-wing of the Tories.  CJCurrie 02:40, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hudak self-identifies as a "purple" Tory. MohammedMohammedمحمد 07:16, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Right wing' as PoV

message: Hudak is now leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario.  However there is little in this article about his views.  Could someone please add to the article what his stated positions are.  The Four Deuces (talk) 05:19, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progressive Conservative Party Leader 

message: Added a tag.  This article reads like a collection of press releases.  Removed a couple of the worst examples of POV under 'official opposition.'Blotto adrift (talk) 03:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: POV tag

message: Added the fact that he smoked marijuana like a cigarette to the personal life section  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.191.137.135 (talk) 03:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marijuana 

message: I have added and cited the information that Tim Hudak completed his masters degree on a full scholarship to the University of Washington. I have also removed the phrase "put himself through university" by working as a border patrol agent. The issue here is very simple. Whoever keeps removing the fact that Hudak got a full scholarship to a U.S. school is doing so for partisan reasons. Mr. Hudak has condemned the government for offering scholarships to international students, even though he himself benefited from an international scholarship. It is therefore very clear why the editor in question has removed the scholarship info and used terminology about Hudak putting himself through university, which I find to be biased language. PLEASE HELP ME STOP THIS EDITOR FROM ALTERING TRUE AND CITED INFORMATION FOR POLITICAL REASONS. Thanks. Atswoyc (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV-Background 

message: I would suggest that the word "riding" be replaced in this article in the information panel and elsewhere as it is a Canadianism that is not widely used elsewhere. The word "constituency" is more standard English in an international setting.
While one might argue that most people interested in this article would be Canadian and not find "riding" unusual, surely the more widely used term would be appropriate for Wikipedia. 95.209.131.107 (talk) 17:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, in Canada the term "riding" is used for the electoral district. MohammedMohammedمحمد 07:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Riding" vs "Constituency" 

message: Two NPOV tags had been put up, in 2010 and 2011, and the article seems to have been corrected since then. I see no POV in the article now.Closedthursday (talk) 22:56, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed POV tags 

message: "Economists say bad math led to Tim Hudak’s million jobs projection" http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario_election/2014/05/28/hudak_brushes_aside_criticism_of_jobs_numbers.html
At some point in Hudak's plan the calculation involved a hokey conversion from person years to jobs by multiplying by a factor involving the number of years when the jobs would be created.  These jobs were theoretical "if plans worked out"--these jobs should materialize.Oldspammer (talk) 04:12, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Person-years math in Hudak's jobs plan 

message: The economic outlook for most nations is that their debt is ever climbing as is the interest payments due each year to carry that debt.  Ontario 2014 debt was high and that is why Hudak wanted to cut Ontario government spending by laying off workers. Increasing debt comes from yearly deficits, and reduced tax revenues when there is high unemployment, and results in commodities price inflation when more money is borrowed to pay the yearly interest owing.  Some naive students of economics (possibly Hudak himself) believe that jobs are created by fostering a nice environment for employers, but this is a fallacy without domestic customers with money (an income from a job) willing to pay for the goods or services offered.  Without enough gainfully employed customers, the result is forgone--company bankruptcy, money gone down the drain.
Fiat money comes from a customer borrowing it from a bank and promising to pay it back plus interest--it does not come from depositor's cash, but from "credit."  Countries like Canada are also borrowers of money from the private banks.  The bank creates the money out of nothing and provides the customer with the funds.  When all money is borrowed at interest, then money is debt as well as a means of exchange.
At the early stages of the 2014 election campaign Hudak was making speeches saying that he was going to eliminate the debt.  If the debt is the money supply or some large component of it, eliminating the debt would require eliminating the money supply or most of it plus any interest owing.  It would have been more appropriate if Hudak had said that he was going to shrink the debt to more manageable levels given the employment situation being unable to sustain current spending levels with existing tax revenues.  When the money supply is shrunken to minimal levels, market liquidity is eliminated so the stock market goes down, unemployment skyrockets, and an economic depression happens.
If 2014 voters realized the various logical fallacies involved in Hudak's platform, it was likely the cause of his party losing the election since early polls had his party ahead of the others. Oldspammer (talk) 04:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic outlook if Hudak elected