jacee

Agreed. $1.4b in taxpayer subsidies to pay exorbitant CEO salaries. That's about $36 from my pocket to theirs. Like the fat cats need me to buy them a case of beer a year!! Hey rich oilman! I want my 2-4 back! :-)

It has always seemed odd to me that Albertans act so mean spirited towards easterners. I truly don't get it. One said to me once that he assumed we talk that way about them too, and he was surprised to hear that I've never heard any of that. Perhaps you can clarify what it's all about? Speaking personally, it has destroyed any interest I ever had in vacationing in Alberta, though I've done so in every other province. I have no interest in facing that kind of prejudice, and it certainly is no joke.

What surpluses?

Hudak is evangelical? And married to the woman who lied to a public inquiry (Ipperwash)? I guess when you have god on your side (or claim to) you are absolved of all sins. I'd love for the media to ask Hudak whether Harris ordered the OPP to "get the f@%!ing Indians out of the park!" Will he bold faced lie like his wife did to the judge? It's fortunate that Harris' Attorney General at least had a conscience and respect for the law.

It's called a democracy where people choose to pool their money to provide essential services for everyone. Don't want to pay taxes? Don't drive on our roads, use health care, education, etc., and no ei, welfare or CPP for you either. Just kidding. ;-) welcome.

I'm impressed by the new MPs. I see no reason to disparage a young working mother who has risen to management with obvious public and people skills and financial management experience, as well as a long history of volunteer political experience. Funny we're not hearing similar complaints about new Con MPs but perhaps that's because they could all be total idiots and it wouldn't matter a bit because they don't get to speak or think anyway, only Harper. They could all be in Vegas all the time and it wouldn't make any difference at all. Think of the money we could save by dumping them! Now that's a farce!

Ready for billions in savings from F35's and ineffective jails for a start, and hundreds of billions from subsidizing oil sands profits, and getting back to the surplus we had before Harper. And what did 'spend and spend' Harper blow the surplus on? More corporate welfare? It's really a matter of where the cuts are. Corporate subsidies to foreign companies hauling in massive profits would seem like a prime place to find the health care money we need for our aging population. At least we get some accounting of where the money went and what we got for it. Where's the evidence of the effectiveness of superjails and corporate welfare?

Funny, aren't they the well heeled and paranoid Harper voters that are so big on spending other people's money on the if-you-build-them-they-will-come superjails bill? I figure this is Harper's homes-for-the-homeless program. However, it would be cheaper (for us) to just pay for housing. ;-) Sure Harper's paying off his election debt to the wealthy.

Now if harper was to crack down on white collar crime he would have my attention. However with his "if you don't get caught it isn't a crime" attitude, that isn't very likely.

What results is Harper looking for for our money and how will the results be tracked and reported to us? I think the new crime bill should be implemented via a surtax on the wealthy if they care about it so much.

I thought the Quebec NDP 19 year old student conducted himself well in the interview. So did Vegas lady. Both did better than Thomas Mulcair. What are the odds that Alberta Con pizza man might be allowed to speak to his constituents sometime?

Isn't that what defines Canada - a balance of both?

It occurred to me during the campaign that the Liberals did not communicate at all what they stand for. The family pack got only a bit of airing and their support of free markets none at all. Perhaps if they'd reminded voters of the latter they might have stopped some of the bleeding of blue liberals to the Tories. However it appears that Ignatieff simply was not an effective carrier of their messages regardless. Jim Prentice, now disaffected from the Harper tories, could carry those messages effectively. What a coup that would be!

I'm no Harper fan, but the part about him not having Bush's intellect was a pretty low blow. Lol

So instead of house arrest at their own expense, we pay $40,000+ a year to house petty criminals in jails ... and this is supposed to make us all feel better? It has occurred to me that Harper's plan for long term care for seniors is to jail all the damn old hippies for growing and smoking pot. Kind of a two birds with one 'stone' policy. ;-)

So true ! Why should we concern ourselves at all with making policy and allocating tax money for the needs and interests of those who don't bother to be counted as Canadians? Those who don't want to be counted don't count. ;-)

You can't change a petition that people have already signed. Again I suggest that you inform yourself of, and work with other organizations that have been having this discussion for some time. To those who prefer the 'omnipotent CEO' model of governance, I would remind you that a democracy is not a for-profit business serving a target market. There are other considerations, like quality of life for vulnerable populations.

I think it's a good idea to have the discussion, but I have strong reservations about it being twisted to serve political instead of popular purposes.

I do believe that parliament should reflect the popular vote more accurately than FPTP does at present, due to leaders like Harris and Harper and Chretien who simply ignore the majority of people who don't vote for them. I've heard it said that FPTP worked ok before the electronic age, but with the speed and precision of information and prediction now, FPTP is more easily manipulated to give a result that doesn't reflect the popular vote - eg by targeting "ethnic and very ethnic" communities that will vote as a block and are large enough to swing key ridings. It seems even democracy has to be updated from time to time. However the trick is to do so without increasing the cost and size of government and in a way that people can easily understand. The reform must stay in the hands of the people as if we give it to the politicians to do, they'll simply distort it to their advantage. The Ontario proposal, for example, involved adding reps from a pool appointed by the parties who would answer only to the party, not to any constituency of voters. (yikes!) So while I may sign your petition, I think we have a lot of work to do before we ask politicians to get involved as they all have a vested interest in the system as it is, since it got them where they are. I would suggest instead working with nonpartisan groups such as Fair Vote Canada or the Council of Canadians to design a cost effective and efficient updated system.

It's just so strange that Harper is now battling the NDP for first place, and the Bloc and Liberals decimated.

why is that? Poor funding? The Alberta Conservative brand of health care isn't very efficient? And didn't I hear that they're shipping in frozen processed food to the nursing homes now instead of cooking local meat and produce onsite?

In geared to income housing, those with the income to pay full market value help to subsidize those who can't. It's a concept that's been around for a long time now. I'm sure there are valid ways of attacking Jack, but this isn't one of them.

It's 'interesting' to see it laid out this way, in terms of the trust funds held by the federal government that belong to First Nations. Unfortunately First Nations on soapboxes or even barricades still don't get an accounting of their funds from Ottawa.

nanos uses a 3 day rolling average, more stable for tracking longer term trends but it doesn't show day to day change. Is anyone connecting the dots yet to the conclusion that if the Ontario trend continues we could be looking at an NDP majority? Unfrigginbelievable!

I wouldn't go that far, but perhaps those who think choosing and defending-to-the-death a particular party ideology (as the party tells them to) are not exercising the full extent of their democratic responsibility. As a pragmatist I understand that the strength of our democracy is in it's checks and balances that limit partisan power. The autocratic business model does not work for democracy, nor does a pure socialist model nor a crony-based free for all, imo. It's the responsibility of Canadians to consider the parties' contributions and sustain the balance that works for us. In my view, when parties use fear tactics to try to control people's votes they are underestimating the intelligence of Canadians and our understanding of democracy. There is no easy answer in democracy, no 'silver bullet/one size fits all forever and ever' solution. It's slow and messy and sustaining it's balance is ultimately not the responsibility of politicians but of all Canadians.