Liberals to run surplus instead of deficit for 2015 -2016
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
At least it doesn't make an already bad time worse and since it was illegal for some decades you can't claim it is responsible for any of the current woes. The part of a few paying black market prices will be replaced by a greater number of people using pot. If smoking is not a person's first choice then a pill that has a known doseage might be a better way ti stay high 24/7
Trudeau is smart that way... Being protected by so many useful idiots acts like a de facto flak jacket to absorb all the negativity.
Actually, pretty smart in a lot of ways
I love the smell of hypocrite first thing in the morning. Didn't your ice-road travels teach you that life for our 'citizens in the far north' is not the same as advertised?? Yet here you are preaching the same old, same old so who is the one lapping up the kool-aid?
Perhaps he is getting a list of options that only the 'old guard' would be able to come up with. We will know he had dictatorial ambitions if he makes himself the Minister of anything but Indian Affairs and in that respect some changes could be made that integrate them into Canadian society at a higher level. That is based in the influx of rebels into Canada from Syria as they would face execution if taken alive in Syria. If anything they should at least get some counseling from a veterans group that deals with taking up 'farming' rather than killing for money. That would seem to be the less bumpy route and one is clearly more honest than the other. As far as the sex issue if that is a problem for some then at their introduction phase they should be at a health spa with women that are paid escorts and they are encouraged to make the advancements if the x-rebel seems a bit shy. A few sessions would seem to be cheaper than treating the trama and the drama that surround real events of that nature.
Citizens would get a free card but then they would have to show they have 'deviant tendencies' and that is sure to get you on some kind of list you don't want to be on.
I don't know if you knew this or not not, but you can vehemently disagree with a government on a number of issues and support it on others. With the Harper Government I was opposed to their treatment of veterans, I also was pretty outspoken about land claims and the situation in the northern reserves, understanding that the Indian Act is a disaster and that a number of reserves are completely mismanaging the money that is given to them. There are a number of things I was critical of the Harper government for including its attack on the CBC and it's stance on marijuana.
As to the Trudeau government. I support a few of the issues they are tabling. Legalizing pot being one. But I don't support them blindly, because their leader was adopted for his status rather than his experience. If I were to embrace the Trudeau government based on one issue that would make me a hypocrite.
Perhaps you should check your shorts, that smell might be something else.
That might have been an apt summation if I was talking about your political views of Harper and JT. My reference was to who fed you some kool-aid in that real life condition in the far north were no as good as you had been led to believe (before going there in person) I have low hopes that you can understand this.
Do you even no what you are talking about?
You called me a hypocrite. "I love the smell of hypocrite in the morning." Your words.
I don't drink Kool Aid, never have. I base my opinions on knowledge.
I have changed my opinions over the years on a number of issues as I gained more insight or rethought my position, but that makes me anything but a Kool Aid drinker or a hypocrite.
It makes me open minded and a free thinker.
Blasphemer!
Seriously? So it's hypocritical to support a govt without truly knowing the conditions up north and then criticize that same govt when you discover just how bad they actually are?
As to your Prime Ministerial references, I got some sad news for ya sport, the conditions on too many of the far north reserves has been sketchy, at best, since long before Harper got in.
The major problem is logistical. While it's not impossible to build a permanent road through muskeg country, it's a massive undertaking and prohibitively expensive. That's why people like RCS play an important role in the winter. The lack of highway connections makes it difficult to provide goods and services we all take for granted. It also doesn't provide for much incentive for the residents to try and create any kind of real businesses because how are they going to get their products out with any regularity?
The FN up north are caught between two worlds, the world of modern conveniences like vehicles, indoor plumbing, electricity, heat at the flick of a switch or turn of a dial on one side, and the desire to remain connected to their past on the other. The idea of living up there, disconnected from society and the world and living off what nature provides and the few supply runs that show up while trying to maintain permanent housing with modern "conveniences" is a losing game for everyone.
The govt will continue to be criticized for some of the appalling living conditions up there, while the Natives continue to suffer because of land rights nonsense.
No it wasn't but you can keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about the Liberals lack of fiscal responsibility.
And I still stand behind them in relation to you and 'kool-aid'.
Let's give up the attempt at putting in cute word for the bore basic word that cannot be mistaken for anything else. drinking 'kool-aid' means accepting a lie for the truth. Nothing more, nothing less. Knowledge can be gotten in two ways, from personal observation and from 3rd hand accounts or the 'opinions' of others.
That brings us to your being in the far north in person and the knowledge that you gained disrupted what you had previously held as being 'the facts'. Without taking that any further the 'facts' you had before getting there were flawed to put it in it's most basic form and that makes it a lie, accidental or intentional doesn't matter. That is the topic that you are denying, that you can be told a lie and will take it for the truth. That could well be the same today and the part later in this post will put you to the test as to how 'kool-aid' free you are at the moment.
That would seem in indicate you have corrected all the 'opinions' you had that were in error. You have to admit that 'believed a lie' is the same as drinking kool-aid before you can deal with if you have drank in the past and are still drinking the same stuff today.
Let's see if that openness can be put to the test based on real world events and the standards we have for ourselves and how that compares to FN people over the last 100 years and today is no different. The situation will be in the next part of this post. (dodging the issue is a sign that you are under the effects of some 'lie', in this case an intentional lie.
He just might be, so might you based on your conclusions to this recent event in the 'far north' and involving FN people.
There was a thread on here a within the last year about a Provincial Prison on Baffin Island and how it was the 'most decrepit' prison in Canada as far as living conditions are concerned. In the article that the thread was based on it was admitted that the place was below housing standards across Canada as far as Public Heath was concerned. The behavioural problems at the prison were also noted and the 'excessive anger' was attributed to overcrowding and the housing standards were not indicated as contributing to any behavioural changes.
At this point kool-aid is being handed out as you are being taken in one direction only and 'overcrowding' in other prisons has never been 'linked' to excessive aggression.
Now add in some info that shows the dangers of those specific contaminants over the short and long term and the fact that for the previous 20 years (or whatever date it was) of substandard living conditions went hand in hand with numerous 'studies' but the elimination of those hazards was never followed up on. That not only opens up the possibility that the living conditions were substandard on purpose and the effects on the prison population were known and monitored closely to observe the effects of exposure to what is called a 'toxin' in the rest of Canada. That points to intentional experimentation of the inmates, not any different than the FN that were in the Residential Schools that were 'experimented on' as a human guinea pig, no other way to put it when those parameters are added to the 'breaking news'.
Your post didn't cover that part of the north's way of 'educating the local population.
It is a lie to say you have never accepted a lie as a fact when your previous posts show that going to the far north was 'eye opener', Those two facts is what my comment was based on. Taking it further involves the prison issue as I think you are both under the effects of some 'lies' and you may not be seeing the truth of the situation and what our level of caring is actually at.
Sport?? lol, okay oh wise and wonderful one.
My example would suggest we take it as far back as 1867 to examine the guidelines about how the FN people were to be treated. I'm quite sure if the refugees were given a full course in how we can treat people they would be less anxious to move here as they are only 1 level above Reservation status.
Rivers would make more sense and even then ice instead of water would be the most convenient but for moving cargo barges like they have on the Mississippi would be needed and the season is short. The good news is Yellowknife be where the roads end when the frost is gone. The muskeg also means any permanent construction should be done on the rocky ridges that are around or you would have to use the lakes and float in the summer and rest on the ice in the winter. Modern containers would make either quite easy to do either.
Let's stay with the ones who decides what cargo is sent up and what options are left off the table. Do the residents get a Sears Mail order book to look at?
It means they need 21st century technology rather tan getting what we consider to be obsolete. 3v indoor lighting and solar garden path markers are probably not on any shipping list yet it could light up any size village with a system that is portable and easy to maintain and has zero impact in the environment.
A bigger issue is you can't be 'taken care of' and own a business at the same time if you are a FN person. Syrian rebel would be a different form and it would be fast-tracked in implementation.
A laptop with Sat internet would fix that up if somebody was to set the Elders up with one that does language translation and all places or interests are only a few clicks away and basic surfing is a 1hr course. How to fix a jerky mouse is something that comes after that.
Maybe we shouldn't be trying to make them in our image. Move them into the next century and use them as BETA testers for the low recourse user. The 21st century dog sleigh is a fold-out and comes with its own power supply. Ski-do that works for extended travel in the winter that is also a bear proof shelter.
It is the intentional conditions that need to be addresses, so far the bury it is holding the winning hand.
There is a problem with all of you; you're amateurs, trying to analyze what is meant by surpluses, deficits, Parliamentary reporting, and the media.
First, if you are in debt for billions of dollars, that is a surplus of debt. The reverse is also true, and probably the mot commonly accepted interpretation of a surplus. For those of you who went to university and actually stayed awake during English classes, the statement, "We are running a surplus." can be interpreted several ways.
Surplus - having more more money (as assets) than what is owed (as liabilities or debts)
Surplus - having an abundance of debt. More than is needed (or wanted). ex. I have an abundance (a surplus) of debt.
Surplus - having (generally) a lot of something.
Politicians, or more correctly, their speech writers, are adept at manipulating the English and French languages in such a way that no matter what the politicians say, they are not lying. Speech writers who fail, are discharged.
Every once in a great while, a politician will say something that is untrue, but it is unintentional, and usually it is a misunderstanding spoken in a scrum, or as an "off the cuff" comment. It is the result of not fully comprehending the question that was improperly phrased by the media. Unfortunately, for viewers at home, this can cause a lot of confusion. Rest assured, you are not to blame. I just wish I could get the media to understand that their reporting inaccuracies are unfair to the public.
I was often asked for an explanation or clarification to articles, statements or releases, similar to the one above.
First, I would like to thank you for allowing me to clear this up. Too many people, including the media and some politicians, are not privy to the Minister of Finance Cabinet reports. The Minister has often said he wished he could allow all Canadians to read the volumes of reports he receives on a daily basis, but they are vetted in such a way that only important and necessary files are put in his desk. And goodness knows, most of it would put you to sleep! But all correspondence, from private citizens or corporations, and even other government departments, is given due diligence. I would like to assure you of this. After all, you have a right to know.
Second, I think everyone can appreciate that some of what is sent to the Minister of Finance does not come from a bonafide economic authority. Indeed, some correspondence is written by unqualified individuals or agencies. Nonetheless, it is the law that all communications sent to his office must be received and vetted. Any action taken will be based on the contents of that correspondence, always given serious consideration and treated in a confidential manner. Just as a point of interest, all material forwarded to any minister is processed and forwarded to the competent authority within that ministry, responsible to take further action, on the ministry's behalf.
I would also like to assure everyone that each government department takes all communications seriously, and confidentiality is guaranteed.
Regarding the recent media statement, it is difficult to predict with 100 percent reliability the veracity of future projections. They are, in fact, future predictions, which can change at any time. I think the best way to demonstrate this is by considering your paycheque. You know what you earn every week, but unforeseen expenditures, illness and variations in consumer prices, like the cost of a litre of gas, can affect your budget.
I can say that we will continue to monitor the financial well being of Canadians. It is something that you have come to expect from government, and is a hallmark of our Parliamentary process.
Thank you.
First, if you are in debt for billions of dollars, that is a surplus of debt. The reverse is also true, and probably the mot commonly accepted interpretation of a surplus. For those of you who went to university and actually stayed awake during English classes, the statement, "We are running a surplus." can be interpreted several ways.
Surplus - having more more money (as assets) than what is owed (as liabilities or debts)
Surplus - having an abundance of debt. More than is needed (or wanted). ex. I have an abundance (a surplus) of debt.
Surplus - having (generally) a lot of something.
Politicians, or more correctly, their speech writers, are adept at manipulating the English and French languages in such a way that no matter what the politicians say, they are not lying. Speech writers who fail, are discharged.
Every once in a great while, a politician will say something that is untrue, but it is unintentional, and usually it is a misunderstanding spoken in a scrum, or as an "off the cuff" comment. It is the result of not fully comprehending the question that was improperly phrased by the media. Unfortunately, for viewers at home, this can cause a lot of confusion. Rest assured, you are not to blame. I just wish I could get the media to understand that their reporting inaccuracies are unfair to the public.
I was often asked for an explanation or clarification to articles, statements or releases, similar to the one above.
First, I would like to thank you for allowing me to clear this up. Too many people, including the media and some politicians, are not privy to the Minister of Finance Cabinet reports. The Minister has often said he wished he could allow all Canadians to read the volumes of reports he receives on a daily basis, but they are vetted in such a way that only important and necessary files are put in his desk. And goodness knows, most of it would put you to sleep! But all correspondence, from private citizens or corporations, and even other government departments, is given due diligence. I would like to assure you of this. After all, you have a right to know.
Second, I think everyone can appreciate that some of what is sent to the Minister of Finance does not come from a bonafide economic authority. Indeed, some correspondence is written by unqualified individuals or agencies. Nonetheless, it is the law that all communications sent to his office must be received and vetted. Any action taken will be based on the contents of that correspondence, always given serious consideration and treated in a confidential manner. Just as a point of interest, all material forwarded to any minister is processed and forwarded to the competent authority within that ministry, responsible to take further action, on the ministry's behalf.
I would also like to assure everyone that each government department takes all communications seriously, and confidentiality is guaranteed.
Regarding the recent media statement, it is difficult to predict with 100 percent reliability the veracity of future projections. They are, in fact, future predictions, which can change at any time. I think the best way to demonstrate this is by considering your paycheque. You know what you earn every week, but unforeseen expenditures, illness and variations in consumer prices, like the cost of a litre of gas, can affect your budget.
I can say that we will continue to monitor the financial well being of Canadians. It is something that you have come to expect from government, and is a hallmark of our Parliamentary process.
Thank you.
Last edited:
That is blatant bullsh*t! Governments are run by humans, humans make mistakes- crap does get leaked out on a fairly regular basis. Apparently unbeknown to Christy Clark until fairly recently, there's three steps to eliminating an email so that it never shows up anywhere at anytime! Christy for one of many didn't know this!
I think you'll find that the minister responsible for every portfolio (even the old, ministers without portfolio) have one or more incompetent/unqualified/duplicitous civil servants on their staff. The greatest difficulty is weeding them out. The public service has a strong union that protects them.
It is conceivable that ministers could make mistakes, but this is rare, given their experience, dedication and education. It is safe to say that one of their staff is at fault. But, being pillars of the community that they are, ministers accept responsibility for the inadequacies of their staff. It's a fatherly approach. They take the high road, and set a fine example of leadership that all politicians and civil servants (hopefully) strive to emulate.
As every minister has said over the years, they wish they could personally interview and hire all the staff in their respective areas, but unfortunately, the public service is responsible for hiring its own. In many respects, this is like letting the fox guard the hen house. It is a shame that the public service does not take responsibility for their bad hires. It's an embarrassment that all Canadians must bear.
I hope this has clarified the issue.
It is conceivable that ministers could make mistakes, but this is rare, given their experience, dedication and education. It is safe to say that one of their staff is at fault. But, being pillars of the community that they are, ministers accept responsibility for the inadequacies of their staff. It's a fatherly approach. They take the high road, and set a fine example of leadership that all politicians and civil servants (hopefully) strive to emulate.
As every minister has said over the years, they wish they could personally interview and hire all the staff in their respective areas, but unfortunately, the public service is responsible for hiring its own. In many respects, this is like letting the fox guard the hen house. It is a shame that the public service does not take responsibility for their bad hires. It's an embarrassment that all Canadians must bear.
I hope this has clarified the issue.