I disagree - unless there is immense national disaster or war, a country should be financed the same way a household is: you pay as you go - perhaps you "borrow" for something major, the way you get a mortgage - BUT YOU STILL MAKE SURE YOU CAN MAKE THE PAYMENTS AND PAY OFF THE LOAN.... regardless of how slowly!
How will a Conservative government be better?
- Thread starter DasFX
- Start date
- Status
That's why I don't understand the Republicans( and conservetives in general) Ten Packs ...they know this. Especially seeing as the leader down here,has shown himself to be overly power hungry. If your debts are paid you buying power is stronger. You are more prepared to deal with emergencies that arise.Everyone that runs a household knows this... And yet...they keep electing the morons.
Its not even that Mr. Mom...its the prevailing attitude that you can borrow yourself into prosperity.Yet Wallstreet, Economic Forcasters,et al... all seem to buy into this looney tunes kind of thinking. Common sense should tell them this. History shows them this ..and for the extreme right wing ....even the bible tells them it won't work. So why do voters of both countries buy into this type of thinking?
Were sold it non stop by the Corporate media Zen Buy buy buy don't worry about the bill seems to be pitch.
mom - let me put it this way.
I am NOT your average Fiscal Conservative, who says "cut my taxes, I dont want to pay so much!" I AM QUITE CONTENT TO PAY FOR WHAT I GET! I simply believe that this country (and Provinces) spent like a drunken sailor for over three decades - and it HAD TO STOP! And it was not the "Boomers" that started it - the first Non-War Deficit Budget came in under early Trudeau - and most of US were still in school!
It was our "post-war/post Depression" PARENTS - who never wanted to fear being without again (and I can't blame them).
BUT PASSING THE PROBLEM OFF TO THE NEXT GENERATION IS NOT THE ANSWER.
Would you say to your wife that you'd really like a cabin at Pinantan, even though you can't afford it. But you talked to guy who has one, that will hold the rent for 10 or 15 years, and then send the bill to YOUR KIDS?
I doubt it..... :roll:
I am NOT your average Fiscal Conservative, who says "cut my taxes, I dont want to pay so much!" I AM QUITE CONTENT TO PAY FOR WHAT I GET! I simply believe that this country (and Provinces) spent like a drunken sailor for over three decades - and it HAD TO STOP! And it was not the "Boomers" that started it - the first Non-War Deficit Budget came in under early Trudeau - and most of US were still in school!
It was our "post-war/post Depression" PARENTS - who never wanted to fear being without again (and I can't blame them).
BUT PASSING THE PROBLEM OFF TO THE NEXT GENERATION IS NOT THE ANSWER.
Would you say to your wife that you'd really like a cabin at Pinantan, even though you can't afford it. But you talked to guy who has one, that will hold the rent for 10 or 15 years, and then send the bill to YOUR KIDS?
I doubt it..... :roll:
I agree with you Ten 8) The only thing is lets not make sure our debts are paid by the people who can least afford it .That seems to be the way the Libs and most Consevatives want to do it .Corporations pay next to nothing the wealthy pay next to nothing the working man gets the bill :wink:
Re: RE: How will a Conservative government be better?
BUSH???
Hell, he is no more a conservative than Ted Kennedy - except on so-called "social/moral" issues.
The BIGGEST growth in government in History - even more than Reagan, who everybody thought was a "conservative". The BIGGEST increase in the National Debt, the BIGGEST increase in Trade Deficit.... the United States is (financially) going down the tubes - and it AINT gonna be nice up here when it happens - they are a HUGE part of our economy.
Be afraid - be very afraid. If you think you will sit back and laugh at it happening to them - you are in a Dream-World.
zenfisher said:
BUSH???
Hell, he is no more a conservative than Ted Kennedy - except on so-called "social/moral" issues.
The BIGGEST growth in government in History - even more than Reagan, who everybody thought was a "conservative". The BIGGEST increase in the National Debt, the BIGGEST increase in Trade Deficit.... the United States is (financially) going down the tubes - and it AINT gonna be nice up here when it happens - they are a HUGE part of our economy.
Be afraid - be very afraid. If you think you will sit back and laugh at it happening to them - you are in a Dream-World.
nah - saw that happen back in the beginning of the 80's, when I lived in Oak Hills..... silver was manipulated by two brothers (forget their names now).... went sky-high, and then collapsed. But as I recall they got caught too - serves them right.
("Hunt" brothers???)
No, I would think about "low-yield"/"HIGH guarantee" investments - "hunker-down".
I am actually thinking about talking to my guy about that soon - even the Financial market has done "dick" since late February....
("Hunt" brothers???)
No, I would think about "low-yield"/"HIGH guarantee" investments - "hunker-down".
I am actually thinking about talking to my guy about that soon - even the Financial market has done "dick" since late February....
RE: How will a Conservati
It was the Hunt brothers, Ten Packs. Film and photographic paper went through the roof and a guy in Regina set up his own silver recovery business where he actually paid all the little labs for their used fix and bleach/fix.
I think the Hunts ended up in jail for a period. They'd angered Kodak when it was the only real producer of film and paper in North America at the time, and a major political influence...not a good idea.
For those who suggest the NDP do nothing but tax and spend...that is not a fair assessment. A balanced budget is a major part of an NDP campaign and they say exactly how they will pay for programs. Tax increases for working people are not one of those hows. The federal platform last year was endorsed by economists. When Roy Romanow was premier of Saskatchewan his government was recognized as the second most fiscally responsible in North America by the accountants...something no Conservative government has ever achieved.
It was the Hunt brothers, Ten Packs. Film and photographic paper went through the roof and a guy in Regina set up his own silver recovery business where he actually paid all the little labs for their used fix and bleach/fix.
I think the Hunts ended up in jail for a period. They'd angered Kodak when it was the only real producer of film and paper in North America at the time, and a major political influence...not a good idea.
For those who suggest the NDP do nothing but tax and spend...that is not a fair assessment. A balanced budget is a major part of an NDP campaign and they say exactly how they will pay for programs. Tax increases for working people are not one of those hows. The federal platform last year was endorsed by economists. When Roy Romanow was premier of Saskatchewan his government was recognized as the second most fiscally responsible in North America by the accountants...something no Conservative government has ever achieved.
Re: RE: How will a Conservati
Actually I will have to agree with you. I am not advocating any policies in my wishes to see a government reorganization. There is a distcinct differance between a government system and the policies that it may decide to bring forth, maintain or whatever.
Personaly I am in favour of our social programs in this counrty as they stand now and would very much like to see them strengthened and functioning properly. Our national medical program, Social security and support for the elderly to name some off the top of my head. and im my view I see those as NATIONAL issues. An acceptable standard is, no one without a roof over their heads, no one starving in the streets, no one living in economic slavery, a respectable level of employment for most. A high degree of personal freedoms. The choice to live how you want, where you want and how you want so long as ones decisions do not adversly affect others. my signature below says exactly what I beieve in.
Again I only hope that the next government has learned its lessons and history does not repeat itself.
Canada could be one of the top leading nations on this planet, with our low population and high natural resource base we have an opportunity like few others. Let us take advantage of what we have and to our best with it not rip the counrty apart over trivial political ends and regional intrests.
Money, the use of tax dollars is a large part of the issue I feel our federal government is much larger than is requred and extremely wasteful in its redundancy. We are stuck in a box created by our founders and constructed with seventeeth century thinking. That is no way to run a country in this day and age and all our difficulties are simply proving that.
We need a new box but let us build it with the good things that made up the old one....................
Reverend Blair said:
Actually I will have to agree with you. I am not advocating any policies in my wishes to see a government reorganization. There is a distcinct differance between a government system and the policies that it may decide to bring forth, maintain or whatever.
Personaly I am in favour of our social programs in this counrty as they stand now and would very much like to see them strengthened and functioning properly. Our national medical program, Social security and support for the elderly to name some off the top of my head. and im my view I see those as NATIONAL issues. An acceptable standard is, no one without a roof over their heads, no one starving in the streets, no one living in economic slavery, a respectable level of employment for most. A high degree of personal freedoms. The choice to live how you want, where you want and how you want so long as ones decisions do not adversly affect others. my signature below says exactly what I beieve in.
Again I only hope that the next government has learned its lessons and history does not repeat itself.
Canada could be one of the top leading nations on this planet, with our low population and high natural resource base we have an opportunity like few others. Let us take advantage of what we have and to our best with it not rip the counrty apart over trivial political ends and regional intrests.
Money, the use of tax dollars is a large part of the issue I feel our federal government is much larger than is requred and extremely wasteful in its redundancy. We are stuck in a box created by our founders and constructed with seventeeth century thinking. That is no way to run a country in this day and age and all our difficulties are simply proving that.
We need a new box but let us build it with the good things that made up the old one....................
RE: How will a Conservati
I'm not at all sure that the size of government can be reduced, Knight. I know several civil servants, mostly retired now, and the cuts have been going on for over twenty years. There aren't a lot of places left to be cut.
They've also chopped the knees out of a lot peripheral things. Expense accounts have always been low in government, now they are laughably so. While entry-level workers earn a reasonable wage, when you go up the ladder you find that executives get far less than their peers in private industry and get none of the common perks like company cars, the ability to fly business class, collection of air miles, upgraded rental cars and hotel rooms etc.
Because of all that, about the only costs that can be cut to any real effect are programs. The programs they will go after...the politicized ones...are health care, pensions, education (I'd make that fully national because I moved around when I was a kid), Indian Affairs, and so on.
The biggest gains in cutting government waste are actually programs for the private sector...corporate welfare, deferred taxes etc. That's where the real money is. It won't be touched, will actually increase, under the Liberals and Conservatives though.
If you want to restructure things the way to go is with proportional representation. That takes the power away from any one party so the policies reflect a wider scope of the Canadian public.
I'm not at all sure that the size of government can be reduced, Knight. I know several civil servants, mostly retired now, and the cuts have been going on for over twenty years. There aren't a lot of places left to be cut.
They've also chopped the knees out of a lot peripheral things. Expense accounts have always been low in government, now they are laughably so. While entry-level workers earn a reasonable wage, when you go up the ladder you find that executives get far less than their peers in private industry and get none of the common perks like company cars, the ability to fly business class, collection of air miles, upgraded rental cars and hotel rooms etc.
Because of all that, about the only costs that can be cut to any real effect are programs. The programs they will go after...the politicized ones...are health care, pensions, education (I'd make that fully national because I moved around when I was a kid), Indian Affairs, and so on.
The biggest gains in cutting government waste are actually programs for the private sector...corporate welfare, deferred taxes etc. That's where the real money is. It won't be touched, will actually increase, under the Liberals and Conservatives though.
If you want to restructure things the way to go is with proportional representation. That takes the power away from any one party so the policies reflect a wider scope of the Canadian public.
Re: RE: How will a Conservati
I am sure your correct about the cuts that have already been made. When I talk about redundancy I am thinking about the simple fact that there is a a high degree of paper shuffling to accomodate the tranfer of funds from the provinces back out to the population in the form of support for our social programs and support services. Can there not be a more direct route for these funds? Impliment a one way idea.
One almost has to break this down to a program to program investigation to make any decisions.
Having listened to representives from our R.C.M.P. , Health care workers. the National research council to name a few who have complained about the lack of funding and or misuse of funds or moneys placed into the wrong areas I have to wonder though. It sounds like it could use a lot of fine tuning yet. lets hope the next crowd in Ottawa works on that.
As for the proportional representation that is basically what I am promoting we simply need a lot more people on that band wagon and get it rolling. I don't think it will happen this time around...........
Reverend Blair said:
I am sure your correct about the cuts that have already been made. When I talk about redundancy I am thinking about the simple fact that there is a a high degree of paper shuffling to accomodate the tranfer of funds from the provinces back out to the population in the form of support for our social programs and support services. Can there not be a more direct route for these funds? Impliment a one way idea.
One almost has to break this down to a program to program investigation to make any decisions.
Having listened to representives from our R.C.M.P. , Health care workers. the National research council to name a few who have complained about the lack of funding and or misuse of funds or moneys placed into the wrong areas I have to wonder though. It sounds like it could use a lot of fine tuning yet. lets hope the next crowd in Ottawa works on that.
As for the proportional representation that is basically what I am promoting we simply need a lot more people on that band wagon and get it rolling. I don't think it will happen this time around...........
dasfx, you started this discussion saying that lying etc, is part of our politicians job description. Image must be everything, because in truth this is not so, at least not in this country. By and large most politicans are hard working people doing a demanding job and their mistake is they try and please everybody some of the time and in the end please no one.
If all politicians were corrupt, this country would be governed like Columbia where most of the politicians are in fact corrupt, or dead.
Now true, there are a number of political leaders who are shady at best, but they are not the majority.
Part of the blame for this is voters who go to the poles and vote liberal, Conservative or New Democrat, without listening to the policies or ideas that they don't immediately agree with. The just elect someone because of the political label they are sporting at the time. After the election the voters are no longer involved and the politicians operate in a vacume, until the voters get upset about something.
Its llike having a garden, if you don't plant anything, or if you don't water it, feed it, or weed it, you soon have a mess sometimes to the point where you no longer have a garden.
I know a little of which I speak, I once ran as a candidate in a federal election. If you asked me a question I answered it, I didn't hedge, I didn't lie, nor did I always stay to the party line. Guess what I didn't get elected.
The result was the opposition, claimed I had or was using their ideas, people sometimes became angry because they didn't like my answer, they wanted to hear something fuzzy and warm, when in reality, the answer to some of our problems are very hard choices that have to be made. In fact the people who were sometimes most angry were those in my own party. Some people believe their party has all the answers or the best answers for the nations problems, when in fact, the solutions are in many cases a combination of ideas that come from different corners of the political map.
Its time as Canadians we understand that one solution is not the only solution.
In many cases politicians are as confused and frustrated as the average voter. Politicians claim they are listening, the problem is they are not hearing, what they are listening to. Voters only care about immediate solutions so they vote for or against something and they are never happy when their idea of an instant solution does not work.
For those who believe in great dark political happenings, forget it, these guys for the most part are not that smart, thats why they get caught.
If all politicians were corrupt, this country would be governed like Columbia where most of the politicians are in fact corrupt, or dead.
Now true, there are a number of political leaders who are shady at best, but they are not the majority.
Part of the blame for this is voters who go to the poles and vote liberal, Conservative or New Democrat, without listening to the policies or ideas that they don't immediately agree with. The just elect someone because of the political label they are sporting at the time. After the election the voters are no longer involved and the politicians operate in a vacume, until the voters get upset about something.
Its llike having a garden, if you don't plant anything, or if you don't water it, feed it, or weed it, you soon have a mess sometimes to the point where you no longer have a garden.
I know a little of which I speak, I once ran as a candidate in a federal election. If you asked me a question I answered it, I didn't hedge, I didn't lie, nor did I always stay to the party line. Guess what I didn't get elected.
The result was the opposition, claimed I had or was using their ideas, people sometimes became angry because they didn't like my answer, they wanted to hear something fuzzy and warm, when in reality, the answer to some of our problems are very hard choices that have to be made. In fact the people who were sometimes most angry were those in my own party. Some people believe their party has all the answers or the best answers for the nations problems, when in fact, the solutions are in many cases a combination of ideas that come from different corners of the political map.
Its time as Canadians we understand that one solution is not the only solution.
In many cases politicians are as confused and frustrated as the average voter. Politicians claim they are listening, the problem is they are not hearing, what they are listening to. Voters only care about immediate solutions so they vote for or against something and they are never happy when their idea of an instant solution does not work.
For those who believe in great dark political happenings, forget it, these guys for the most part are not that smart, thats why they get caught.
The topic of this thread was how will a conservative government be better. In many posts, I have expressed an opinion that the National Day Care program is unnecessary, and fiscally irresponsible. This is based on having been involved in the child care industry for the last 18 - 20 years. I have maintained that there are sufficient programs now for day care without another one. I have also maintained that the majority of parents, mother or father, who work would like one parent to be home with their children. In the Calgary Sun May 14, in an article by Bev Smith, who is a teacher and mother, she quotes a study that supports my views:
The Vanier Institute found 90% of people asked thought the ideal is for one parent to be home with small children, and most mothers who earn full time wish they only had to earn part time.
I have maintained that there should be a choice for parents, and the tax system should be rejigged to allow the parents to have this choice. Others on this thread have decried this theory, maintaining that "Canadians want Day Care". Of course they do. They already have it. The difference between the lefties who support this new version and the righties is that the lefties think that both parents should work, because that is their right. The conservatives, on the other hand, want to provide a choice for parents whether to have both work or not. The above study results bear this out. Canadians do not want this version of a fiscally irresponsible day care program.
The Vanier Institute found 90% of people asked thought the ideal is for one parent to be home with small children, and most mothers who earn full time wish they only had to earn part time.
I have maintained that there should be a choice for parents, and the tax system should be rejigged to allow the parents to have this choice. Others on this thread have decried this theory, maintaining that "Canadians want Day Care". Of course they do. They already have it. The difference between the lefties who support this new version and the righties is that the lefties think that both parents should work, because that is their right. The conservatives, on the other hand, want to provide a choice for parents whether to have both work or not. The above study results bear this out. Canadians do not want this version of a fiscally irresponsible day care program.
RE: How will a Conservati
I don't quite know how to tell you this, Blue, but most Canadians don't live in Alberta. Most Canadians don't hate women or look at children as fodder for the oil fields either.
I know your hubby likely taught you that it's best to be pregnant and barefoot, but real women have actually decided to be real people. Call it double tasking...
I don't quite know how to tell you this, Blue, but most Canadians don't live in Alberta. Most Canadians don't hate women or look at children as fodder for the oil fields either.
I know your hubby likely taught you that it's best to be pregnant and barefoot, but real women have actually decided to be real people. Call it double tasking...
Where did that come from?
I'm a real woman, and I choose to work part time so I can be home when my children are. It's a choice I made, and it doesn't make me any less a woman for it.
I've made sacrifices because I believe it's important.
I'm a real woman, and I choose to work part time so I can be home when my children are. It's a choice I made, and it doesn't make me any less a woman for it.
I've made sacrifices because I believe it's important.
Re: RE: How will a Conservati
What the hell was that about? I assume it had something to do with actually providing choices to people, instead of herding them all in the same direction, lemming like.
So 13 hour per day, seven day a week daycare for kids under 6 is good for you? Why would we want to make the kids work day longer than the parents work day (quoting the same article). Who hates women? Who looks at kids that way? And my wife really resents you describing her as less than a real woman. She works harder than anyone I know, and given how you give me such a hard time for not being here 24/7, I'm pretty sure she works harder than you do too. You inability to provide choices to people is really disturbing. What kind of hidden agenda do you actually have for Canada? No difference of opinions and no choice. As you have said you represent the NDP, then this must be their policy, and if not, then I guess it must be their real hidden agenda.
Reverend Blair said:
What the hell was that about? I assume it had something to do with actually providing choices to people, instead of herding them all in the same direction, lemming like.
So 13 hour per day, seven day a week daycare for kids under 6 is good for you? Why would we want to make the kids work day longer than the parents work day (quoting the same article). Who hates women? Who looks at kids that way? And my wife really resents you describing her as less than a real woman. She works harder than anyone I know, and given how you give me such a hard time for not being here 24/7, I'm pretty sure she works harder than you do too. You inability to provide choices to people is really disturbing. What kind of hidden agenda do you actually have for Canada? No difference of opinions and no choice. As you have said you represent the NDP, then this must be their policy, and if not, then I guess it must be their real hidden agenda.
- Status