The Canadian election………….

[Fingertrouble]

The reason Chretien cancelled those helicopters was that Canada was broke after nine years of Mulroney. Who signed us into the God-awful penalty agreement? It wasn't the Liberals.

Tell me something Juan? If you ordered a car but had to sign a contract that if you cancel the order you end up still having to pay 2/3rds of the final cost without getting the vehicle, would you still cancel the car order?

NO! But your Liberal Party did and ended up having to pay HUGE amounts because they cancelled those helicopters!

Liberals should not only be ashamed that they yet again are unable to be trusted with the Canadain taxpayers money, they also cost jobs that would have come to Canadian companies, but worse still they undoubtedly cost Canadain Armed Forces personnel their lives. Your party should hold their heads in shame, whilst rotting in a prison cell for their misuse (ok, lets call it what it was....fraud and theft) of taxpayer's money.

 

[Unforgiven]

A carbon tax is a tax on everything that needs to be transported.....therefore.....a carbon tax is a tax on everything.

And today Dion challenged Harper because he didn't promise to steal more of my guns (did you catch that, Juan?)

I pray Harper gets a majority......the rest are just so much worse.

From your point of view that is. You see while it's clear that you can't live without your guns, some of us can live quite happily without a single handgun being sold in Canada.
So while you pray that Harper gets elected there are some pretty valid reasons for people to pray that Anyone but Harper is elected and if that means that you have to turn over your handguns and either get along without them or leave the country, it's well worth the price.

Tax isn't a bad thing. Hell imagine a country without taxes. The point is what is taxed and what is being done with those taxes that are collected.

For now, you and a number of other fit into the slightly exclusive group that feel would benefit from a few of the Harper policies. Should we go down that road, it is only a matter of time before you find yourself on the other side of that ever shrinking exclusivity.

Then as has happened in the past, Harper will turn over the reins and run for cover as the latest version Neocon party is turfed from politics once again and the only other party that can lead, being appointed.

Don't think of what's immediately good for Colpy, think of what's best for the country and the people.

 

[Colpy]

From your point of view that is. You see while it's clear that you can't live without your guns, some of us can live quite happily without a single handgun being sold in Canada.

Okay, fine......but if you plan on taking guns from me which I either inherited or bought in good faith and used safely......then the onus is on you to show how that will significantly reduce violence and/or crime in society.

Good luck with that.

As well, compensation must be paid..........and that has never been done.

So while you pray that Harper gets elected there are some pretty valid reasons for people to pray that Anyone but Harper is elected and if that means that you have to turn over your handguns and either get along without them or leave the country, it's well worth the price.

It is well worth WHAT price? Prove it.

Tax isn't a bad thing. Hell imagine a country without taxes. The point is what is taxed and what is being done with those taxes that are collected.

Of course taxes are necessarry......carbon taxes are idiocy.....they raise the price of everything, and damage the economy, cause grief to the poor, who have to pay more for food, heating, transportation..........

For now, you and a number of other fit into the slightly exclusive group that feel would benefit from a few of the Harper policies. Should we go down that road, it is only a matter of time before you find yourself on the other side of that ever shrinking exclusivity.

Then as has happened in the past, Harper will turn over the reins and run for cover as the latest version Neocon party is turfed from politics once again and the only other party that can lead, being appointed.

Don't think of what's immediately good for Colpy, think of what's best for the country and the people

Oh believe me, I am clearly thinking about the good of the nation, about hauling us back from the cultural precipice the Liberals have driven us to..........

 

[Unforgiven]

Okay, fine......but if you plan on taking guns from me which I either inherited or bought in good faith and used safely......then the onus is on you to show how that will significantly reduce violence and/or crime in society.

Good luck with that.

As well, compensation must be paid..........and that has never been done.

Why would it reduce violence or crime? If anything it would reduce death and injury by handguns. But that isn't the point. The point being that if you go looking out for only your own interests without concern for the interests of others, then you should expect the same treatment. Right or wrong, if people think that getting rid of all the handguns will solve some problem they feel is important, then along your line of thinking, it's just tough for you. Can you see where this is a problem? Is there a view here that you should consider while forming your own position?

It is well worth WHAT price? Prove it.

In context, you losing the legal privilege to enjoy handguns in a lawful manner, is well within the price that some people will gladly pay. Though they may not have any exposure to handguns at all, they see no reason what so ever not to force you to turn yours over to be destroyed. They won't look out for you, much like you won't look out for them.

Of course taxes are necessarry......carbon taxes are idiocy.....they raise the price of everything, and damage the economy, cause grief to the poor, who have to pay more for food, heating, transportation..........

But what you have left out here is that they also force people to change. Seemingly when left to change for themselves, only a portion of the population will change. A significant portion of the rest will not change and some will even make a point of going out of their way to waste more. The return to disposable over packaged goods for the sake of convenience as an example.

A carbon tax will help to urge competition in lowering carbon foot prints in manufacturing and distribution, which in turn, will lower taxes and respond to an increasing pollution problem.

Oh believe me, I am clearly thinking about the good of the nation, about hauling us back from the cultural precipice the Liberals have driven us to..........

Ah cultural precipice! Please expand on this if you will. Start with whose culture we're talking about here.

 

[Colpy]

[

quote=Unforgiven;985129Why would it reduce violence or crime? If anything it would reduce death and injury by handguns. But that isn't the point. The point being that if you go looking out for only your own interests without concern for the interests of others, then you should expect the same treatment. Right or wrong, if people think that getting rid of all the handguns will solve some problem they feel is important, then along your line of thinking, it's just tough for you. Can you see where this is a problem? Is there a view here that you should consider while forming your own position?

By definition, a ban on handguns would reduce only the attacks done with legally held handguns...........practically non-existent. Also, the example given by Dion in his challenge to Harper was the Dawson College fiasco........in which the idiot fired 72 rounds of 9mm ammo and managed to kill one person, shooting her 10 times. He also had a 12 ga shotgun.........the lethality of which runs at about 90% fatalities, according to FBI reports......take the handgun (the least powerful of weapons) and he uses the shotgun, killing many more.

BTW, it is called "individual rights" when the collective is forestalled from abusing the person......and yes, stealing my guns is abuse.

In context, you losing the legal privilege to enjoy handguns in a lawful manner, is well within the price that some people will gladly pay. Though they may not have any exposure to handguns at all, they see no reason what so ever not to force you to turn yours over to be destroyed. They won't look out for you, much like you won't look out for them.

If these people wish to steal my property, then the onus is on them to show that this violation of my rights serves society in some significant way......and you can't do that.....so you have no right to seize my property.

But what you have left out here is that they also force people to change. Seemingly when left to change for themselves, only a portion of the population will change. A significant portion of the rest will not change and some will even make a point of going out of their way to waste more. The return to disposable over packaged goods for the sake of convenience as an example.

A carbon tax will help to urge competition in lowering carbon foot prints in manufacturing and distribution, which in turn, will lower taxes and respond to an increasing pollution problem.

Canada produces 2% of the GHG in the world...............a carbon tax might reduce that by what? 1 or 2 percent? That would be what ........perhaps 4/100ths of the world total? For that you want to tank the economy? Insignificant........there has to be some return on all this sacrifice for the collective.

Ah cultural precipice! Please expand on this if you will. Start with whose culture we're talking about here.

We're talking about good-ole-boy white guy judeo-Christian culture........that ain't the PC way to say it, but that is the truth. You know, the cultural of rule-of-law balanced by individual rights, the culture of freedom of expression, the culture that takes pride in being the absolute apex of human development, the culture of western civilization........the culture of the developed world, the culture of democracy and tolerance that has endowed us with so many benefits........

 

[Unforgiven]

[

By definition, a ban on handguns would reduce only the attacks done with legally held handguns...........practically non-existent. Also, the example given by Dion in his challenge to Harper was the Dawson College fiasco........in which the idiot fired 72 rounds of 9mm ammo and managed to kill one person, shooting her 10 times. He also had a 12 ga shotgun.........the lethality of which runs at about 90% fatalities, according to FBI reports......take the handgun (the least powerful of weapons) and he uses the shotgun, killing many more.

Here I thought I was being blunt.
The point I'm trying to make Colpy, is that in looking out for yourself, you miss the larger picture. In looking out for me, you take the onus upon yourself to ensure that activity that take upon myself that isn't harming another, is not criminalized for the benefit of a political move to win votes. In turn I look out for you in that the legal use and possession of handguns by those who can prove they are capable and responsible with them remains a reality in Canada.

Honestly it doesn't matter to Dion or Harper one way or the other.

BTW, it is called "individual rights" when the collective is forestalled from abusing the person......and yes, stealing my guns is abuse.

I would agree with that. So is it in my best interest to see that your rights aren't abused for the sake of a political sound bite during an election?

If these people wish to steal my property, then the onus is on them to show that this violation of my rights serves society in some significant way......and you can't do that.....so you have no right to seize my property.

Yet here the Harper government wants to throw me in jail for nothing other than smoking my own plants. So in a way, we are in a similar situation. Legal wrangling doesn't change the harm factor.

Canada produces 2% of the GHG in the world...............a carbon tax might reduce that by what? 1 or 2 percent? That would be what ........perhaps 4/100ths of the world total? For that you want to tank the economy? Insignificant........there has to be some return on all this sacrifice for the collective.

First understand that the economy is going to tank. It is built on a poor foundation and it's doomed to collapse. We can prop it up a little for a while, but it's inevitable that the economy will sink.

Once you come to grips with that, you can begin to think on how it is that you can build the new economy so that these problems don't occur again. And so far there has been no sacrifice what so ever. Shouldn't we take our portion like everyone else?

We're talking about good-ole-boy white guy judeo-Christian culture........that ain't the PC way to say it, but that is the truth. You know, the cultural of rule-of-law balanced by individual rights, the culture of freedom of expression, the culture that takes pride in being the absolute apex of human development, the culture of western civilization........the culture of the developed world, the culture of democracy and tolerance that has endowed us with so many benefits........

It is smart only to hold on to the best practices. The rest can go the way of disco and the Dinosaurs.

Many cultures live here in Toronto. Most folk, bring their best practices with them. Food, entertainment and morality among many other things. Those of us that live here enjoy that but we surely don't want the wrongful and bad aspects of their culture being imported here. So why should it be any different for the established WASP? We have plenty of really great things in our culture that we can and should be proud of. But we should preserve something that is wrong for the sake of tradition and holding on to culture. All of that must be kicked to the curb or as a people, we will never grow.

 

[Tonington]

I don't really understand the Conservatives opposition to the carbon tax. Conservatives are supposed to favour market solutions over government regulations. The Liberals are proposing a historically Conservative policy, adjusting the market conditions so that something is no longer externalized. Then the market will deal with it. The Conservatives have imposed government regulations on emissions, and that-if we take what Conservatives say-is a Liberal tactic.

Conservative minded folk are poo-pooing the fiscally Conservative approach, and saying nothing of the regulation happy Conservative party. Neither have they proposed a single solution, just bafflegab rhetoric about Al gore or some other science unfriendly stuff.

Talk about Bizarro World or what...

 

[darkbeaver]

Anyone up for a friendly wager? I say Harper gets a majority.If you think otherwise,the loser stays away from this forum for a month.Also,has to put up a message(written by the winner) declaring the other superior in every way. Any takers?

Yer on Wallyj. Friendly wager my ass I want coin. I don't know if I could stand your absence for a whole month though Wally, I would get woonwee. Of course the results would be subject to external review I presume especially in light of tampering in the States.:lol:

 

[Avro]

:lol:

I know, it's funny watching cons turn into liberals to get votes. Many economists cite consumption tax to be beneficial including Harper (former economist) yet they reduce the gst and propose a reduction on the excise tax for diesel fuel.

.....and cons march right along with them like sheep.:lol:

 

[darkbeaver]

I don't really understand the Conservatives opposition to the carbon tax. Conservatives are supposed to favour market solutions over government regulations. The Liberals are proposing a historically Conservative policy, adjusting the market conditions so that something is no longer externalized. Then the market will deal with it. The Conservatives have imposed government regulations on emissions, and that-if we take what Conservatives say-is a Liberal tactic.

Conservative minded folk are poo-pooing the fiscally Conservative approach, and saying nothing of the regulation happy Conservative party. Neither have they proposed a single solution, just bafflegab rhetoric about Al gore or some other science unfriendly stuff.

Talk about Bizarro World or what...

There is no conservative party in Canada. Preston Manning runs this country from a chapel in Albertonia.

 

[Tonington]

If Manning were running the show, there would be more free votes. Too bad he isn't actually.

 

[Avro]

Also,relating to my above posts. I work for the gov't and am surrounded by left-leaning people,from devout truthers to soft liberals. I am on my own,but privately a few people do support me. About 3 weeks ago,right after Obama's Berlin stunt, I said that I would put $100 on a McCain win.No takers,just like here. Now that Palin has been chosen, I may have to give odds.

You know, even though I think McCain will win, I'll take that bet.

Make it $1000 for Obama to win.

Deal?

I'll froward this to wallyj.

 

[Zzarchov]

One of the first acts of the Conservatives when they came to power was to fix election dates on a set four year term......therefore, by law, the next electtion is supposed to be Oct. 19, 2009, unless the gov't loses a confidence motion in the House.

Constitutionally, however, Harper can go to the GG and ask her to disolve the House at any time..........

Socrates is corect in this case.

Personally I think the GG should HAVE to offer the other parties the option to form a government before calling elections.

 

[Risus]

Personally I think the GG should HAVE to offer the other parties the option to form a government before calling elections.

I kind of like that idea.

 

[lone wolf]

Personally I think the GG should HAVE to offer the other parties the option to form a government before calling elections.

Works for me.... I vote aye....

 

[TenPenny]

I haven't seen any discussion about this on here, so I'll bring it up.

In Winnipeg, Harper was asked what kind of vegetable he thought he would be, and he laughed, and explained that he pictured himself more as a fruit - sweet and juicy. Now, no matter what you think of Harper, just picture how much laughter this must have caused amongst the press gang, and probably heart attacks among his advisors. I think it's priceless.

 

[Risus]

I haven't seen any discussion about this on here, so I'll bring it up.

In Winnipeg, Harper was asked what kind of vegetable he thought he would be, and he laughed, and explained that he pictured himself more as a fruit - sweet and juicy. Now, no matter what you think of Harper, just picture how much laughter this must have caused amongst the press gang, and probably heart attacks among his advisors. I think it's priceless.

It was a pretty stupid question in the first place...

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Thanks Colpy. I am hoping that socrates,dark beaver,dancing loon or one of the other zealots will man up. But,.............you know,it is easy to talk the talk.

Hey Wally dear forum friend not zealot, I don’t know about the other people here but I have manned up long time ago………..
Did you hear the speech of the St. John Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams, he loves Harper……………………….and you know why? As Danny Williams put it today on television was quote “Harper is a fraud” and you can take that to the bank… Danny Williams is urging Newfoundlanders to refuse Harper as the alternative for Canada’s wellbeing……………and you know Wally after is all said and done Canada will be better off in the hands of the Liberals. A Liberal Canada will give many poor an equal opportunity…………. Please keep in mind that the puffin flying over Dion and SH!TING on him has given Harper and his Conservative losers a black eye that will be there until the 14th of October and beyond…… You must remember what happened to Kim Campbell……….The Canadian voter took a big dump on the Con machine and put it out of function……….

 

[TenPenny]

Liberals may give 'many poor' more opportunity...or just many poor civil servants.

We'll likely need another 2 or 3000 staffers to administer the green shi(f)t, and another 3 or 4000 to write position papers and policy statements. As long as somebody's willing to pay for it, I guess that's good.

 

[darkbeaver]

As long as the money stays in the community I think it's appropriate that every effort is made to filter the wealth of this great land through responsible hands and let it naturally trickle down to the street where it can be vacuumned up by the various corner store operations that are in fact the backbone of this bastion of democracy. The destruction of Wal-Mart would improve the economic lot of all Canadians and small retailors could begin to sell Chinese made junk far more cost effectivly than the giant beurocrazys like Wal-Muck and Home-O-Pot.