Taking kids with sniffles to the E.R. and grandpa falling down the stairs in a drunken stupor. :lol:
Always remembering what a Harper majority means
- Thread starter PWS
- Start date
Taking kids with sniffles to the E.R. and grandpa falling down the stairs in a drunken stupor. :lol:
I think this would be an excellent topic for another thread. I totally disagree with you.
Well, a Liberal supporter would tend to think that it needs protection from Conservatives. If we are looking at the finer shades of grey rather than black vs white, I would agree with them.
Well, if it were only Conservatives that were doing that, I would agree. But that isn't what cranky said is it?
Why does it need protection from the Conservatives?
What's the threat?
this was already asked and answered. Liberals see Conservatives and Conservative values as the threat. If you get the Conservatives to back off on any specific policy, the Liberals would still see the Conservatives as the threat.
:roll:
That would indicate that you agree, that the Conservatives pose a threat to health care.
What threat do the Conservative pose to health care?
You still haven't explained your position and to be honest I am interested in hearing some reasoning, because it doesn't make any sense to me. Mulroney never did anything to jeopardize the Canadian Medicare programs, and neither has Harper. It was never part of the much-maligned Reform Party platform either, save as to look at the possibility of private sector options in some areas to cut costs... pretty much the same attitude that was attacked when the Alberta PCs adopted it under Klein. Conversely, under Chretien and Martin, funding from Ottawa to the provinces to fund Medicare was cut, leaving the provinces responsible for making up any shortfalls or cutting services... and with the further action that when the possibility of privatizing some services was raised (mostly by Alberta's gov't) the feds threatened to withhold more funding.
Now I am not a proponent of an American-style system (the quality of care for those covered is top notch but a huge portion of the population is NOT covered and I see this as a major drawback) but there are other private and publicly blended systems in other parts of the world (mostly but not exclusively in Europe) that we could possibly learn from. But closing our eyes and saying there can be no private sector involvement in health care solutions is as ridiculous as saying we need to adopt a US-style system.
I disagree. I think you understand my position and don't need it explained. I shared it, you read it.
I think you want me to support it with facts or evidance so you can debate it's merrit. Why not come out and ask me to do this, then I could say yes or no to your request?
Instead, you are implying that my sharing is wrong just because I didnt present it in a way that you can debate.
Understand what I'm saying here?
Yes, i absolutely understand what you're saying here. You can't defend you claims with fact.
Thanx for clearing that up.
I didn't know that a general belief that Liberals see the Conservatives as a threat to medicare needed to be defended with fact.
btw, "can't" means that I tried, and failed...or was not permited.
a better word would have been "won't"
I didn't know that a general belief that Liberals see the Conservatives as a threat to medical needed to be defended with fact.
It doesn't. it's been pretty clear over the last few elections where the Liberals have used health and the Conservatives "hidden agenda" to try and scare voters.
:roll:I didn't know that a general belief that Liberals see the Conservatives as a threat to medical needed to be defended with fact.
That isn't what you said.
This is...
That "secret agenda" was just as well hidden in Mike Harris's elections. I survived his peculiar version of "common sense" (just barely) To me, Harper is the same thing in a different wrapper....
Dude, are you are so invested into this debate, you are taking one of my recent comments - one that was a direct response to a comment made just prior to it - and you are making it look like a direct comment to something that I wrote 10 minutes ago.?
Furthermore, you aren't doing that to ask for clarification, you are doing it to support an implied assertion that you are making. And I guess that is what really makes it objectionable to me.
Hey, I was just pointing out what you said, and what you are trying to backpeddle on.
If you don't, won't, or can't support it, I don't really care.
Whatever dude. I'm not the one that claimed our health care system needed protection.
You can object to that all you want. I just wanted to know what it needed protection from.
ok, thanks. I dont and won't support it, simply because it was the direction that I'm not interested in going. I was more interested in my general idea that the Conservatives need a free hand even if our goal is to have a better Liberal government in the future. a debate on who or what was a threat to medicare.........well, as you wrote, I don't really care.
You see! I think you really did care. And, you hated the way I was answering your questions.
Actually, I was enjoying the way you answered my questions.
It was more illuminating and entertaining, then you can imagine.
Anyways, you've made your position clear, you don't want to support your claim with something tangible. Fair enough, I already moved on, when you replied, the first time. I reply to all posts directed at me.
Yes, thanks for showing up. now where were we? oh yeah..........I think that in order to have a better Liberal party in the future, and to have a party that is more medicare friendly than the Conservatives(ie less of a threat).........I think that it would be easier to get voters to grow fond of the Liberals again, if we gave the Conservatives the majority that they need to clean up the Liberal's mistakes.
Personally, I would find it easier to grow fond of the Liberals if someone would clean up their mess. Iggy doesn't seem interested. Why don't we ask Harper to do it?
Any thoughts on the matter?
How can we have a dialog, if you keep saying this, without identifying what you mean. Especially when it seems to be the crux of your position.
How are the Conservatives 'unfriendly' to health care? How are they a threat?
How can I give you any thoughts, if you won't tell me what the threat is?
I'm genuinely curious.
You say this all the time, but it's clearly not the only fix. People are living longer, and with that comes challenges, many of which have not been met, such as the projected costs due to dementia. You yourself said that lifestyle alone can't keep your blood pressure in check. The medical system has to adapt.