Derek 2.0

Why? David Cameron used the threat of a Labour/SNP coalition government (and it tax policies) to win his current Majority Government.

What is funny about? The Balanced Budget Act didn't come into force until late June of this year....

In your opinion......as already noted, it worked for David Cameron.

The Gullible? Are those the ones that enjoy "beer and popcorn"?

It's not illegal to run deficits during a recession, per the legislation.

So the problem is what? Since 2013, the rules encompassing taxable income gained from foreign investment have been further defined and clarified ......You feel it wrong for Canadians to invest outside of Canada? What of foreigners that invest in Canada?

How is it myopic? I feel the Federal Government has enough revenue, even too much, to do its job......hence those that suggest the Government needs more of my money, to do even more of (what I feel) others jobs, I will oppose.........I feel not wanting to pay for city buses and daycare, that I'll never benefit from, is hardly lacking imagination, and those that feel the Federal Government should involve itself in daycare/transit, are day-dreaming.

Yup, and the Boks regained some of their composure against Samoa. Didn't watch the Canada game, I am surprised how strong the French look (granted they have played two weak teams), as there were questions surrounding their team going in.......waiting on England/Wales, starts at noon.

Dangerous games? That sounds scary........one would assume if there was a need to raise taxes, the Government would be afforded the political capital to do so...........I'm not sure that lack of funding for National Daycare and investment in transit buses constitutes a Clear and Present Danger to our way of life.

The policy plank is a win-win regardless if they Liberals/NDP take the bait........PM Harper says he won't raise taxes, but he's willing to go further and make it law for this Parliament.........so why don't the Liberals and NDP agree to a similar pledge and enact it into law? Clearly they want to raise your taxes

Why would he report him? Until the Tories changes to the Income Tax Act, Mr Love's involvement in sheltering money in offshore trusts wasn't illegal.

I actually didn't bother reading most of your post past your mention of Mr Crosby. I linked to the previous topic on Crosby, in an attempt to both give you reference to the other discussion on him, and help to keep this thread on topic. I assumed you hadn't seen the Crosby thread.

So is the forum search function

And of course, changes to the tax code in 2012 and 2013......

Well that's good too......the Tories will gladly keep repeating that they will lower taxes and the Liberals/NDP/Greens will raise taxes, so much so, that the Tories will make "tax hikes illegal" and the Opposition refuses to comment because they want to raise taxes........... In electoral politics: Tax cuts > " tax hikes for social democracy " Simple, but true.......if it wasn't, the Liberals/NDP wouldn't be so remiss and cautious when speaking about their planned "revenue tools"......

Good, then the Liberals and NDP shouldn't have a problem rallying public support against both CPC planks.......since deficits and tax increases are so popular of course.

I hope very much the NDP and Liberals campaign against a "no tax hike law".......maybe the can borrow New Labours' and the SNP's talking points.

Well it worked for David Cameron earlier this year:

What money is being wasted?

Are we not paying for MP's salaries regardless?

One tenant, which I haven't seen personally from this proposed legislation, but is reported in the Huffpost: Rather vague, I'd like to see the meat and potatoes, but in spirit another form of populism........

Yes, as per the wording, it would require another party to repeal the legislation to raise revenue, likewise, during the election campaign, will warrant a response form the NDP and Liberals..........it is purely symbolic, well utilizing one tenant of mechanical advantage for politics: It doesn't cost anything to taxpayers and contrasts two types of political belief between the Tories and Liberals/NDP/Greens........its policy fluff, but brilliant, yet simple politics.

The subject of the alleged case, Andrew Olivier, is quadriplegic, and records conversations instead of taking notes, hence how said conversation with Lougheed was recorded......clearly a recorded conversation with Wynne, in which she breaks election laws etc, would be even more damning.

I would assume that he was.......what with you mentioning him in your OP and all.

You have no evidence, of any sort, that the OPP won't conduct an unbiased investigation on Mr Lougheed........the reality is quite the opposite to your claim of a OPP/OLP conflict of interest.......what with a Ontario Liberal party staffer being charged by the OPP and all. If you have any actual evidence to suggest that the OPP won't conduct a proper criminal investigation of Mr Lougheed, by all means present it.......if not, I'll leave you to your conspiracy theory.