What are your 'fringe' political ideas?
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
One thing I wouldn't mind seeing would be to shift the international aeronautical, maritime, and UN languages to an easier neutral one, just on the grounds ofjustice itself. It woudl also help put the world on a more equal footing and so put an end to the flow of money to English-speaking countries.If we believe in justice, of course.
Foreign? Foreign has nothing to do with it.
I guess the people of Nunavut don't need to learn to speak Chinese then, do they. If those that don't speak French or English can get along without speaking either language then there is no problem. If they can't the, as I've said, they can expect everybody else to adapt to them or they can learn French or English. They can externalize or internalize. Part of the problem in this world is the desire to make ones problems everybody elses problems.
They should be available in whatever language there are available in. If English people can't find a job and function adequately in Montreal, move.
It's got nothing to do with might makes right. It has to do with advanced vs non advanced. I know there are those that glamorize the existence of native cultures. There are also people that have the Disney view of nature. It does not make it right. The native population in North America were barely more advanced then cave men and for all intents and purposes there is no aboriginals that would want to go back to that way of life. After all, there is very little stopping them.
We were referring to when the Europeans had first arrived, not now.
Yet even now, did you know that Cree schools now teach in Cree until grade four in parts of Quebec, and they're plannig to add to that? That would not have been possible unless their language's vocabulary should have expanded to deal with various academic subjects. After all Bahasa Indonesia was nothing more than a trade Pidgin a few decades ago. The government expanded the vocabulary and now it's an academic language quite capable of literary and academic pursuits.
Yet even now, did you know that Cree schools now teach in Cree until grade four in parts of Quebec, and they're plannig to add to that? That would not have been possible unless their language's vocabulary should have expanded to deal with various academic subjects. After all Bahasa Indonesia was nothing more than a trade Pidgin a few decades ago. The government expanded the vocabulary and now it's an academic language quite capable of literary and academic pursuits.
Though I will concur on the whole noble savage ideal. It's not something I find all that unappealing, the real old ways that is.
Ummm, Cannuck, I'm going to take that as a mis-communication and at worst, perhaps just a little of you may not be aware of.
Because I can assure you, my people, the Six Nation, Onondaga were not just this side of cavemen.
Sure you could argue it, but it be an attempt at the futile. We had a system of Governance, that was, despite claims to the contrary, the Founding Fathers of the US' choice of frame work. We had a complex society, matriarchal, and cooperative.
Yes, there was violence and fighting between Nations, but not within the Confederacy. Treaties were our way of dealing with the issues of conflict, long before the Europeans put them on parchment.
It wasn't a mis-communication and I am aware of what aboriginals had accomplished 500 years ago. The comment still stands. They had not developed much beyond cave men, especially when compared to Europeans.
Cannuck, this is usually when I take people apart, but I like you so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.
I sense your position on Natives is less then stellar. I can accept that, I too have a less then stellar view of my own people.
But you can not support the assertion that we were essentially cavemen upon the European arrival. It's impossible and quite frankly, it pains me to say it, a position that is so irrational and unable to be supported, that it could have easily come from SJP.
Being April, the tax month, my fringe political idea is that there must be a better way for a citizen to pay his dues to society than the current method.
Russia went from an impoverished country in 1989 to a rich almost super power by imposing fair and equal tax on all its citizens.
The system of taxation we have in Canada surely has earned its author(s) a very special place in Hell.
Somewhere below mass murderers and pedophiles.
But above abortion "doctors".
Russia went from an impoverished country in 1989 to a rich almost super power by imposing fair and equal tax on all its citizens.
The system of taxation we have in Canada surely has earned its author(s) a very special place in Hell.
Somewhere below mass murderers and pedophiles.
But above abortion "doctors".
Last edited:
Same in the US YukonJack - but I think the government prefers their mystery system so we can't figure out we are all being ripped off. If hell is crowded, I think the U.S. Feds have pretty much filled it up.
If a flat tax were imposed - we'd all know the numbers and they would have to account for where the money was spent.
Is that any way to run a nation? HA!
I thinka flat tax would be awesome. But I don't think the idea fits into the "fringe" category.
Actually, I think I'll mention flat tax nect time I bump into a fed. Just to watch the color drain from their face.
"Accountability" would be another term I think would have the same effect. Wonder where my MP is right now.:-?
Actually, I think I'll mention flat tax nect time I bump into a fed. Just to watch the color drain from their face.
"Accountability" would be another term I think would have the same effect. Wonder where my MP is right now.:-?I have no intention or desire to hijack this thread, as I've been accused of doing elsewhere.
So, I am kind of cautious about expanding my suggestion of flat tax as a fringe political idea.
Actually, I would like flat tax combined with a consumption tax to replace ALL the existing taxes, municipal, provincial and federal.
A combination of a reasonable flat tax along with consumption tax would be only UNFAIR to those freeloaders who don't pay any taxes now, nor do they have any intention to any taxes EVER.
So, I am kind of cautious about expanding my suggestion of flat tax as a fringe political idea.
Actually, I would like flat tax combined with a consumption tax to replace ALL the existing taxes, municipal, provincial and federal.
A combination of a reasonable flat tax along with consumption tax would be only UNFAIR to those freeloaders who don't pay any taxes now, nor do they have any intention to any taxes EVER.
Consumption tax is good in that it's next to impossible to do any tax evasion, other than not buying the product in the first place
Personally I'd rather a resource tax over a consumption tax. After all, why should food be taxed? Non-renewable resources, on the other hand, are resources we intend to preserve and so such a tax would help to discourage their consumption too. This way they could kill two birds with one stone, bringing in revenue while preserving resources.
Another advantage with a resource tax is that it doesn't tax work, especially in a recession. For example, while it might be reasonable to tax steel, taxing cars is a diferent matter, since then we're taxing not just the steel but the labour put into buiding the car too. We might want to preserve resources, but we don't want to discourae work either. Besides, with gas, steel, and other resources being taxed, the car factory wold have paid enough tax already in the resources it purchases for the construction process without having to add an additional tax on the car itself.
Another advantage with a resource tax is that it doesn't tax work, especially in a recession. For example, while it might be reasonable to tax steel, taxing cars is a diferent matter, since then we're taxing not just the steel but the labour put into buiding the car too. We might want to preserve resources, but we don't want to discourae work either. Besides, with gas, steel, and other resources being taxed, the car factory wold have paid enough tax already in the resources it purchases for the construction process without having to add an additional tax on the car itself.
Also, to make sure that no labour is taxed, any resource tax should be taxed at the source only. For example, an oil extraction company would have to pay so much money to the government per barrel extracted. This way we can ensure that labour is not taxed there either, but only the oil. From that point onward down the line, the tax would be passed on as overhead cost, but the more work is put into the product, the more diluted the tax becomes since the labour put into it would not be taxed.
I agree, but obviously the majority don't. Last summer here in B.C. a carbon tax (which is revenue neutral) was placed on gasoline purchases and periodically we get cheques back in the mail. Well 8 months later the screaming has just settled back to a dull roar. I'm happy with it and have since traded in a vehicle for one that is more fuel efficient. So big deal I pay a couple of cents a litre more and buy about 2/3 as many litres and get cheques to boot. Who in their right mind can complain about that?
And another thing I would like about a resource tax is that, unlike income tax, you have some control over it. Obviously you can't choose to have no income, unless you don't mind starving of course.
As for a resource tax, though, you do have some control. You want to buy a hummer, pay the tax on the steel. Sure it's indirect 'cause the factory paid the tax, but trust me, it gets passed on in the price of the hummer. You want to drive that hummer every day, fine, gas tax. You want to buy a big log house, fine, lumber tax.
But if you decide to buy a bicycle, the tax you'd pay on the steele used in building that bicycle would be minimal. Yo want to build your house using recycled materials, then no tax. Heck, if your bicycle is built of recycled steele, no tax on that either. It's your choice and you have some control in how much tax you pay.