Further to the questions that I have posted on May22, 2010, in 'Is the Lobbyist's "Consideration" to Your Political Party's President & You, Adequate?', regarding "The Australian Question" ("The AQ") as it pertains to Canada, there have been several questions that have been raised that Canadians and others have found interesting. I have concluded that the interest in "The AQ" depends a great deal upon how much one knows about it..
For example, how much of the lobbyist's "consideration" is going to your MP's party president (and/or others) for "going-along" with the deprivation of the simplest & most basic criteria/information that is found in "The AQ"?
And, as an expert psychologist has linked this deprivation of the criteria/information to a high rate of despair, disenchantment, suicides, etc., some have insisted that this deprivation is, amongst other things, a personal embarrassment (& humiliation) as a Canadian, especially for those who are involved with sovereignty, foreign investors, immigration, international finance/affairs, emigration from Canada, etc. And, therefore, as a consequence of this embarrassment/humiliation, etc., some have suggested that they are insisting on "a much larger increase in their portion" of the lobbyist's "considerations".
A couple of the parts of "The AQ" that I am interested in (& you maybe interested in) are:
1) learning more about the comprehensive criteria (as opposed to the short version of the criteria), in order to get a better understanding of what "a fairer portion of the "consideration" means,
2) learning how much "the non-good corporate citizens of Canada" (ie. those corporations that are operating in Canada who follow the economic policies and interests of their country-of-origin and do not necessarily follow the policies of the Canadian government), and others, can; a) assist Canadians to get the criteria/information for their humble consideration and thereby, help Canadians obtain a "larger" portion of the lobbyist's "considerations" and b) what it might cost Canadians to learn about the aforementioned info. from this source (unless, "of course", "the non-good" corporations are the employers of the aforementioned lobbyist in the first place, then...)
and
3) etc.
And, while some have suggested that their embarrassment/humiliation regarding "The AQ" is more than sufficient reason to leave Canada (sovereignty, or, emigration), others, as I may have mentioned before, do not want any Canadians to leave before paying (ie; "avoiding") their portion of the compensation (for the deprivation of the criteria/information) that is part of the basis of "The Australian Question" as it pertains to Canadians and others. Once again, doesn't it (the amount of your portions of the "consideration" and the compensation, etc.) depend upon how much of the aforementioned criteria/information that your MP can learn, or, has learned from the lobbyist, et al, and is willing to share (or, insisting on sharing) with you?
Some have asked; is the "holy grail" of "The AQ", a) the receiving of the portion of the lobbyist's"considerations", or, b) the receiving of the critreia/information about "The AQ" for their humble consideration? And, I have added that one might insist that your (future?) MPs, et al, answer (as opposed to "respond") to some (all?) of these questions, et al, and insist that if the MP does not have the info., then perhaps, the MP might consider start getting the aforementioned info. (not for his/her career & her/his beliefs) and start sharing it with you. (On the other hand, one person suggested; "Just ask your MP; 'who does know?', and he (your MP) will be able to figure it out ; ie. his/her (the MP's) days in public life are 'whining' down".
By way of closing, did your MP (from a traditional, but presently, non-governing party, or, an "Independent") share with you what his/her portion of the lobbyist's "considerations" is and what portion of it was she/he (your MP) going to give you before you had the opportunity to ask him about it? Did the aforementioned MP learn about "The AQ" from the MP from Calgary, SouthWest, or, from the lobbyist who is depriving you of the criteria/information and your portion of the (/his?) 'considerations"?
On the other hand, I'm not sure if I agree with the fellow who suggested that until he is making, at least, as much as "his" member of parliament and starts getting the answers to some (all?) of the aforementioned questions (and other?), he will defer paying his taxes.
For example, how much of the lobbyist's "consideration" is going to your MP's party president (and/or others) for "going-along" with the deprivation of the simplest & most basic criteria/information that is found in "The AQ"?
And, as an expert psychologist has linked this deprivation of the criteria/information to a high rate of despair, disenchantment, suicides, etc., some have insisted that this deprivation is, amongst other things, a personal embarrassment (& humiliation) as a Canadian, especially for those who are involved with sovereignty, foreign investors, immigration, international finance/affairs, emigration from Canada, etc. And, therefore, as a consequence of this embarrassment/humiliation, etc., some have suggested that they are insisting on "a much larger increase in their portion" of the lobbyist's "considerations".
A couple of the parts of "The AQ" that I am interested in (& you maybe interested in) are:
1) learning more about the comprehensive criteria (as opposed to the short version of the criteria), in order to get a better understanding of what "a fairer portion of the "consideration" means,
2) learning how much "the non-good corporate citizens of Canada" (ie. those corporations that are operating in Canada who follow the economic policies and interests of their country-of-origin and do not necessarily follow the policies of the Canadian government), and others, can; a) assist Canadians to get the criteria/information for their humble consideration and thereby, help Canadians obtain a "larger" portion of the lobbyist's "considerations" and b) what it might cost Canadians to learn about the aforementioned info. from this source (unless, "of course", "the non-good" corporations are the employers of the aforementioned lobbyist in the first place, then...)
and
3) etc.
And, while some have suggested that their embarrassment/humiliation regarding "The AQ" is more than sufficient reason to leave Canada (sovereignty, or, emigration), others, as I may have mentioned before, do not want any Canadians to leave before paying (ie; "avoiding") their portion of the compensation (for the deprivation of the criteria/information) that is part of the basis of "The Australian Question" as it pertains to Canadians and others. Once again, doesn't it (the amount of your portions of the "consideration" and the compensation, etc.) depend upon how much of the aforementioned criteria/information that your MP can learn, or, has learned from the lobbyist, et al, and is willing to share (or, insisting on sharing) with you?
Some have asked; is the "holy grail" of "The AQ", a) the receiving of the portion of the lobbyist's"considerations", or, b) the receiving of the critreia/information about "The AQ" for their humble consideration? And, I have added that one might insist that your (future?) MPs, et al, answer (as opposed to "respond") to some (all?) of these questions, et al, and insist that if the MP does not have the info., then perhaps, the MP might consider start getting the aforementioned info. (not for his/her career & her/his beliefs) and start sharing it with you. (On the other hand, one person suggested; "Just ask your MP; 'who does know?', and he (your MP) will be able to figure it out ; ie. his/her (the MP's) days in public life are 'whining' down".
By way of closing, did your MP (from a traditional, but presently, non-governing party, or, an "Independent") share with you what his/her portion of the lobbyist's "considerations" is and what portion of it was she/he (your MP) going to give you before you had the opportunity to ask him about it? Did the aforementioned MP learn about "The AQ" from the MP from Calgary, SouthWest, or, from the lobbyist who is depriving you of the criteria/information and your portion of the (/his?) 'considerations"?
On the other hand, I'm not sure if I agree with the fellow who suggested that until he is making, at least, as much as "his" member of parliament and starts getting the answers to some (all?) of the aforementioned questions (and other?), he will defer paying his taxes.