What are your 'fringe' political ideas?

[SirJosephPorter]

Please, judge an idea on its own merits and not on its source! By the way, Zakat is not based on wealth, but on 1/40 of income.

Sorry, Machjo, you are wrong here. Zakat is paid on the wealth, not on the income. Refer to the following websites.

Zakat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IslamiCity.com - Zakat

the Zakât page

Zakat is 1/40th (or 2.5%) of your wealth, not your income.

And you evidently have no idea how politics works. Suppose a politician runs on the platform of wealth tax, what would be the result? First, the right (which is an enthusiastic supporter of the flat tax) will be strongly opposed to it. The right does not like the wealth tax. Then they will point out to the people that it is an Islamic concept. If the tax proposed is 2.5%, it will be referred to as Zakat, if it is 5%, it will be referred to as double Zakat.

In an election, the optics will look terrible. People have an instinctive fear of anything that smacks of Islam. When it is pointed out to them that wealth tax is an Islamic concept, that will be the death knell of wealth tax.

Unfair, I know. But that is how politics works. Life (and politics) isn’t fair. Wealth tax has even less of a chance of getting enacted than the flat tax does,

 

[Machjo]

It is a shame that they were allowed to get that much power, I know they were granted a lot of lea way in the your Charter. I also know that some made fun of the Gov. of Texas suggesting secession, but there are a lot of things to consider it that was serious. Is Quebec capable of becoming a independent country, by that I mean natural resources, economic means etc. to be self sufficient. Off hand, without knowing how they plan to do it, I would think Texas has a better chance of doing it.


I've said this before, but it needs saying again. Is Canada a Nation or a lose network of Provinces.

That subject would make a topic for the citizens to consider.

So how were the British to crush the French language in Lower Canada while they wre busy fighting the Americans? To avoid a two-front war, the british cut a deal with their French-speaking subjects. Now they can live with it. It'll teach them not to go out of imperialistic ventures. Maybe that's why Canada is relatively less imperialistic than the British were; we've seen what it reaps.

As for Quebec's natural resources, where do you think New York State gets much of its hydro power from?

 

[lone wolf]

So how were the British to crush the French language in Lower Canada while they wre busy fighting the Americans? To avoid a two-front war, the british cut a deal with their French-speaking subjects. Now they can live with it. It'll teach them not to go out of imperialistic ventures. Maybe that's why Canada is relatively less imperialistic than the British were; we've seen what it reaps.

As for Quebec's natural resources, where do you think New York State gets much of its hydro power from?

The Cree and Mohawk nations?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Sorry SJP, you're right. Zakat is based on wealth, and here are the details:

Zakat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But again, judge an idea on its own merits and not on its source. Zakat is a damn good idea if you ask me.

You posted this while I was preparing my post. I gave three references because Wikipedia says that the information given there may not be accurate.

But as I said, good idea or not, tell people that it is based upon Sharia and it is dead.

 

[Machjo]

Please, judge an idea on its own merits and not on its source! By the way, Zakat is not based on wealth, but on 1/40 of income.

Sorry, Machjo, you are wrong here. Zakat is paid on the wealth, not on the income. Refer to the following websites.

Zakat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IslamiCity.com - Zakat

the Zakât page

Zakat is 1/40th (or 2.5%) of your wealth, not your income.

And you evidently have no idea how politics works. Suppose a politician runs on the platform of wealth tax, what would be the result? First, the right (which is an enthusiastic supporter of the flat tax) will be strongly opposed to it. The right does not like the wealth tax. Then they will point out to the people that it is an Islamic concept. If the tax proposed is 2.5%, it will be referred to as Zakat, if it is 5%, it will be referred to as double Zakat.

In an election, the optics will look terrible. People have an instinctive fear of anything that smacks of Islam. When it is pointed out to them that wealth tax is an Islamic concept, that will be the death knell of wealth tax.

Unfair, I know. But that is how politics works. Life (and politics) isn’t fair. Wealth tax has even less of a chance of getting enacted than the flat tax does,

First off, I think that some here were using the idea of a fat tax very loosely, some using it simply to mean a simpler and more straightforward tax, not necessarily a retrogressive or even proportional tax.

Now as for how politics works, if indeed people are so shallow in their thinking processes, then that puts the whole idea of democracy itself into question. Should we go for a technocracy instead?

If we intend to have an effecive democracy, and people are going to vote against a new idea because of its associations, then we need to seriously revamp our education system. Our teachers have failed our society. Time for a revolutionary turning of our education system upside down, don't you think?

 

[ironsides]

So how were the British to crush the French language in Lower Canada while they wre busy fighting the Americans? To avoid a two-front war, the british cut a deal with their French-speaking subjects. Now they can live with it. It'll teach them not to go out of imperialistic ventures. Maybe that's why Canada is relatively less imperialistic than the British were; we've seen what it reaps.

As for Quebec's natural resources, where do you think New York State gets much of its hydro power from?

That's a good answer, forgot that both wars were pretty much back to back. As for New York getting it's power, they own roughly half of the Niagara Power produced.

 

[Machjo]

Another point. If a politician, from the right or left, should object to Zakat or any similar concept because of its islamic roots, then another savvy politician could turn around and make that politician look ridiculous by parodying him. He could just turn around and explain that based on that criterium, we're Nazis because we use certain technologies. I don't think anyone's ready to scrap our highway system and rockets and even some forms of medicine just because they have a Nazi past.

And I can't imagine that even the most rabit anti-Muslim would support banning modern algebra because of the Muslim contribution towards it. And I'm sure many an elementary teacher would not take too kindly to banning the abacus because of tis Chinese origines.

By the way, the US federal system has Iroquis roots too. So should any American who doesn't like American Indians propose abolishing the federal system?

A simple mockery of such an association would tear a politician down in a flash. I'm sure most voters are not that stupid, and would appreciate the humour.

 

[Machjo]

The Cree and Mohawk nations?

Ah yes, good point. I likes that. So if they decide to stay with Canada, Would Quebec grant them the same right of secession as Canada grants Quebec?

One standard for all, right.

 

[Cannuck]

Would Quebec grant them the same right of secession as Canada grants Quebec?

It doesn't matter. Kweebeck would have to fight the US, Canada and the natives in order to prevent them from leaving. That would never happen.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

First off, I think that some here were using the idea of a fat tax very loosely, some using it simply to mean a simpler and more straightforward tax, not necessarily a retrogressive or even proportional tax.

Now as for how politics works, if indeed people are so shallow in their thinking processes, then that puts the whole idea of democracy itself into question. Should we go for a technocracy instead?

If we intend to have an effecive democracy, and people are going to vote against a new idea because of its associations, then we need to seriously revamp our education system. Our teachers have failed our society. Time for a revolutionary turning of our education system upside down, don't you think?

You may not like it Machjo, but that is how democracy works. Let me ask you something. You come across as an honest person, I am sure you will give an honest answer.

Suppose a politician in Canada or USA (call him Mr. Smith) campaigns on the idea of a wealth tax. The other side is opposed to it. The other side calls it Sharia tax (much better than Zakat, most people haven’t heard of Zakat).

The other side claims that this candidate is an Islamic sympathizer, that he wants to bring Sharia by stealth, by back door. Then they explain to people the truly horrible aspects of Sharia (stoning women to death, cutting off a thief’s hand etc.). By innuendo and inference they try to link the two. They say that Mr. Smith wants to appease the Islamic minority in Canada (or USA) and hence he is trying to introduce Sharia tax.

Then suppose some Islamic clerics here endorse the wealth tax, saying that it is in accordance with Koran. That will pour gasoline on the fire.

Now be honest. Do you think Mr. Smith has a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting elected? I don’t.

 

[Machjo]

You may not like it Machjo, but that is how democracy works. Let me ask you something. You come across as an honest person, I am sure you will give an honest answer.

Suppose a politician in Canada or USA (call him Mr. Smith) campaigns on the idea of a wealth tax. The other side is opposed to it. The other side calls it Sharia tax (much better than Zakat, most people haven’t heard of Zakat).

The other side claims that this candidate is an Islamic sympathizer, that he wants to bring Sharia by stealth, by back door. Then they explain to people the truly horrible aspects of Sharia (stoning women to death, cutting off a thief’s hand etc.). By innuendo and inference they try to link the two. They say that Mr. Smith wants to appease the Islamic minority in Canada (or USA) and hence he is trying to introduce Sharia tax.

Then suppose some Islamic clerics here endorse the wealth tax, saying that it is in accordance with Koran. That will pour gasoline on the fire.

Now be honest. Do you think Mr. Smith has a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting elected? I don’t.

Are you suggesting that Shari'a cares for the poor?;-)

 

[Machjo]

Just throw the argument back in his court. If he's trying to woo anti-Muslims, just point out the advantages of such a tax and then turn around and say that he's the one trying to promote Islam by trying to associate such a good idea with Shari'a.

 

[Machjo]

Or, on a more serious note, educate the masses to judge ideas on heir own merit, and promote education reform.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Or, on a more serious note, educate the masses to judge ideas on heir own merit, and promote education reform.

Machjo, something similar happened in Ontario elections last time. Conservative leader, John Tory put forth the idea of government subsidizing all the private schools (currently government finances only the public and Catholic schools).

All Hell broke lose. That was the main topic during the election. Questions were raised, was the government going to finance Islamic Madrassas? What if they teach their students to be terrorists, are we going to finance terrorist training?

Liberals exploited the issue beautifully, they ran a masterful campaign against Tory, he didn’t know what hit him. McGuinty was already popular with the people (he had just cleaned up the gigantic economic mess left by Mike Harris), so liberals would have won anyway. However, Liberals got an increased majority, and John Tory’s proposal to support private schools was party responsible for that.

Similarly, the issue of wealth tax (which will invariably called Sharia tax) is ripe for demagoguery and exploitation. It will be easy to do, Mr. Smith wouldn’t stand a prayer.

 

[darkbeaver]

Or, on a more serious note, educate the masses to judge ideas on heir own merit, and promote education reform.

That is a serious note and its gotten lots of people arrested. They gave us a little schooling once, reluctantly, they've long since realized it was a mistake I think. Education that's what TV does ain't it. Revolt rebell reform they are all bad for the people who count. I think education is the best idea for any problem, but the people who count think miseducation is better. The best reform would be to make education free but its cost has steadily risen all through the economic miracle.

 

[Machjo]

Machjo, something similar happened in Ontario elections last time. Conservative leader, John Tory put forth the idea of government subsidizing all the private schools (currently government finances only the public and Catholic schools).

All Hell broke lose. That was the main topic during the election. Questions were raised, was the government going to finance Islamic Madrassas? What if they teach their students to be terrorists, are we going to finance terrorist training?

Liberals exploited the issue beautifully, they ran a masterful campaign against Tory, he didn’t know what hit him. McGuinty was already popular with the people (he had just cleaned up the gigantic economic mess left by Mike Harris), so liberals would have won anyway. However, Liberals got an increased majority, and John Tory’s proposal to support private schools was party responsible for that.

Similarly, the issue of wealth tax (which will invariably called Sharia tax) is ripe for demagoguery and exploitation. It will be easy to do, Mr. Smith wouldn’t stand a prayer.

I see yor point. So my newly adopted province (I wasn't here during that election) comprises bigots I see. Then education reform is seriously needed, as we truly are becoming an ignorant nation of bigotted ignoramuses.

The Green Party had suggested compulsory education in the world religions along with one school board for all. I actually agree with that. Familiarity with the sacred texts of the world's major religions should be viewed as a part of a well-rounded, cultured person.

Politically it might be untenable though, so possibly an alternative solution would be to say that we must all pay a proportional education tax, deductible from any charitable contribution to a public school of your choice. That might be one way to promote religious equality in Ontario while ending the preferential status given to Catholic schools.

 

[Machjo]

Another point. I don't see why we should fea Islamic schools any more than we should Christian ones. I guess Ontario's a truly bigotted province.

 

[Machjo]

That is a serious note and its gotten lots of people arrested. They gave us a little schooling once, reluctantly, they've long since realized it was a mistake I think. Education that's what TV does ain't it. Revolt rebell reform they are all bad for the people who count. I think education is the best idea for any problem, but the people who count think miseducation is better. The best reform would be to make education free but its cost has steadily risen all through the economic miracle.

There's more than enough money for quality education for all. The problem is government mismanagement of the funds. I don't trust it on that front anymore.

What I'd love to see would be an earmarking system with little money really going into government hands. Just to take an example:

Let's say we had a poor tax of 2.5% of income, to be earmarked towards the poor, and 100% deductible from any personal charitable contribution earmarked towards the poor. This way, if you don't trust the government, you can give it to a charity your trust yourself, thus keeping the government's dirty paws off of it.

Then we could have a school tax of a certain percentage of income. Again, it would have to be earmarked towards education, and if you don't trust the government to do that, it would be 100% deductible from any personal donation to a school of your choice.

Then we could have a wealth tax of let's say 1/19 of non-essential personal accumulated wealth. Again, 100% charity deductible for those who don't trust the government.

We could have a ceiling on personal non-esential accumulated wealth, but a high one. And again, if the rich don't trust the government, they can keep themselves below that ceiling as they wish.

And for basic government expenses, it could get its money from selling resources on crown land, or collecting it from fines for violations. Only those last two should actually go through government hands compulsorily, just enough for basic government operations.

If we did that, we'd see alot less corruption in the govenment.

 

[Cliffy]

A friend sent me this today. This was pretty fringe back in '83.
View attachment 1089

Original Quesnel Green Party members. From front L. Laurence Mongrain, Jeweler, Joseph Jourdain, former Mayor of Wells, Arthur Topham, Pub/Ed of RadicalPress.com, Shastah Topham, Spiritual Response Therapists, Cliff Woffenden, Artist, Author, Publisher. Rear. Douglas Gook, Green Party candidate for Cariboo North in May 12, 2009 Provincial Election. Circa 1983 Photo:© RadicalPress

 

[Machjo]

True enough, Cliffy. Every good idea starts off as a frindge idea and eventually becomes mainstream.