When someone comes into the PMO so secretly, like Harper, he has an agenda and only his wife probably knows. Harper is for private health care, he for expanding the military which will cost billions and billions of our money and with that he needs the workforce to go with it. Any voluntaries? Keep in mind that there are the "powers that be" that want Canada and the US to become one. Mulroney and Bush gave us free trade, Harper and Obama may take our citizenship. Watch exactly what powers the US will have with the perimeter security for North America. Harper knows the opposition parties would fight him on this and so he NEEDS a majority. This is not fear mongering, this is a possibility. As far as spending money, there still the ever rising cost of the F-35, corp.tax cuts, jails and there also the new bridge between Windsor and Detroit, which can is flipping for the whole cost, somewhere between 500 mil and a Bil. You know that 45 Bil that was in EI, well last night in the debates there's a 7-17 Bil deficit! So within 5 years the Conservative.reform.alliance party, better know as CRAP, has spend the 13 billion surplus, + the 56 billion deficit + 7-17 billion EI fund, billion on G20 and the list goes on.
Always remembering what a Harper majority means
- Thread starter PWS
- Start date
Probably not a heck of a lot wrong with either one. Public health care has it's problems.
His election was secret?
Jobs are a good thing.
How many times must it be said, the US does not want 30,000,000 more socialist democrats.
They'll have the same powers and same job they always had, umbrella for those that don't put money into their own military.
And you know that for certain?
How else will the Yanks get to our casino's quicker?
Quite.
Dude, you and I are way more left wing than the Dems.
Compared to the US Dems, Carl Marx is sitting to our right.
Last edited:
I'm aware, which is why I say conservative Americans wouldn't want 30,000,000 more social democrats. The liberal Americans probably wouldn't mind.
The Conservatives are excellent Liberals. They really haven't changed anything or do anything different than Liberals.
Except on issues of crime, military procurement, environment, health care, provincial transfers, and handling of the economy. Otherwise, bang on!
If the Liberals got in do you think they would drastically change any of the Con policies?
On TV it's the good cop bad cop portayed but in the end both are cops.
What on earth did the Liberals do on the environment? Other than vague promises to do something maybe sometime.
We do have laws that cover all the essentials which is why unions are irrelevant. Especially government unions. Government jobs are either essential services or redundant and by their very nature should not have the right to strike. True there are some benefits to unions, especially where they have industry wide bargaining which can work for both sides. But they should not be permitted to be involved in politics, especially in donating members money to the leadership's favorite political party when union membership is a condition of employment. Now I can come up with a list of pros and cons for unions quite easily but most of the pros are covered by labour legislation and most of the cons cost workers with ambition money and only serve to protect the lazy.
If Harper had a pesronality and his cabinet didn't look like the cast of Revenge of the Nerds I may have considering voting....
Yes. Mandatory minimums, the procurement of new fighter jets, expanded prison system, tax policy, etc.
Well, the Conservatives canceled some programs that the Liberals started, such as the Renewable Power Production Incentive. The two parties to me, clearly differ on environmental policy.
Whether or not their policies achieve anything, they clearly have different management styles when it comes to environmental issues.
All of those goodies took a Parliamentry vote to implement. What was stopping the LIbs, NDP and le Bloc from voting no?
When renewable energy doesn't consist of taking food off of the global table or require a vast array of eco-unfriendly minerals and compounds then perhaps it will go some place.
That trillion dollar lithium score we made in A-Stan will be a bonus for the green types. What do you figure on that?
1. Readiness to campaign.
2. Toppling the government over such votes creates strong talking points for Harper.
3. It's far more politically palatable to attack those platforms with different legislative agendas.
For starters...
All True....
But none of which is a defense for voting in favour of efforts they now find to be beyond the Pale.......