CPCFTW

Michael this is the type of post that you condone by not discouraging its discussion while arguing that a post about firing all teachers is unworthy of discussion. So Michael, since you condone this discussion, do you want humanity to follow the path of apocalyptic war over arctic resources, or to cease pursuing growth and "share what's left"?

Very good. You can count!

I did. Post 34.

Neither have mine. My criticism being that your criticism of unlikely scenarios is unbalanced.

Not you in particular. However, as the discussion "facilitator", I expect that if you are going to discourage discussion of an unlikely event, then you should do it in an unbiased manner. What I'm saying is that I've seen discussions about stopping oilsands development altogether, the world ending in the near future due to climate change, eliminating canada's military and relying on US defense, eliminating the fractional reserve banking system, occupy movement leading to revolution and a new world order, etc., but I don't recall you wanting to end those discussions. Yet firing striking teachers is the scenario you think is too unlikely to warrant discussion?

Firing striking teachers is far more likely than adopting many of the climate change mitigation strategies espoused here, yet you never seem to have a problem discussing those Michael.

What a nonsensical argument. Are you seriously comparing private sector executives to public sector teachers?

You asked me. Don't ask if you don't want an answer. I definitely don't agree that it is that difficult to fire all the teachers.. But it's heavy-handed, and most politicians don't want to appear tyrranical.

I'm thinking that some of the striking teachers will come to their senses when they're unemployed.

Ok we will have few engineer grads to pick from. Your point? Are there many engineer grads teaching now? There would be plenty of capable grads willing to teach grade school to high school. This isn't rocket science.

Are you saying all teachers are strikers? Also there are a swarm of majors with every degree looking for jobs. I don't think there would be any shortage if we removed the unnecessary 1yr teacher's college barrier to entry.

People are still trying to equate oil & gas tax breaks to green energy subsidies?

Yes Michael.. I can see it happening. Step 1: claim that teacher's work to rule actions necessitate legislation of even lower wages and benefits and some layoffs to hire employees who will take over the duties teachers refuse to do. Step 2: wait for teachers to stomp their feet and illegally strike Step 3: fire all the strikers and bring on the scabs!

It's not just you. FYI all the people in this thread that are posting "it's just you" are the type of people you described in your OP. There are many NDP supporters on these forums who made the very same ridiculous arguments and insisted Canada needs to change its electoral system. They also believed in Brigette Depape's arguments that Harper did not have a mandate and that Canadian citizens should engage in civil disobedience to protest his tyranny. Go ahead and search their posts.

More personal damages than 3000 deaths and 6000 injuries? What a horrible comment. Par for the course though from you though.

Ireland failed because of excessive public spending increases and government policy that encouraged a housing bubble, not low corporate taxes. Low corporate taxes propelled an agrarian economy into one of the highest gdps per capita in the world after a few decades.

Oh wow.. actual polling data?! Let's review some more actual polling data: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011 Whoops.

Employment income tax is pretty much corporate tax anyway. Without employment income tax, private companies could pay much less and offer the same disposable income. Labour costs (and prices) could decrease tremendously with lower taxes.

Corporate taxes account for 32B out of 209B total tax revenue. Personal income tax is 125B, and sales tax is 31B. It's quite realistic if cutting corporate taxes induces any kind of growth in employment and wages (thereby increasing personal tax revenue and reducing social expenditures). Furthermore, with our progressive taxation, personal income tax revenue increases very quickly with wage growth.

•will not submit student attendance •will not participate in curriculum/course writing •will not collect textbooks at the end of the semester/school year Hahahaha... I can't wait for these bums to get thrown out. Bring in the scabs!!

I'm arguing that voting to cut funding to healthcare, necessitating cutbacks in some areas which may include treatment of the mentally ill, is not murder. I'm also arguing that saying that it is, is idiocy. Do you disagree? Perhaps you can put forth a better argument than "I argue that it is"

Dima Otvertchenko · Los Angeles, California Romney's one of the last toolbags I want to defend, but this "omg they are purposely deceiving people" post is nonsense. It is absolutely a panoramic shot, done poorly - probably on a phone, and the auto-stitching software did the best job it could. Anyone who's ever tried to take one would recognize that. The "cloned areas" are spots of overlap done by the auto-stich. You can double check this by crossing your eyes -- you'll notice that the angles of the lines are slightly different due to the change of camera angle, and some of the people have moved slightly in between the several pictures. Most obvious of all -- clearly that's the same vertical column with round base. No person in their right mind on Photoshop would try to double it for no reason only to have it fade up into thin air on top. The double column happened because the auto-stitch software confused the walkway on the left of the column for the concrete border to the right of column. It tried to merge the two together in that center image. That yellow shirt wasn't "cloned in" -- that chap was sitting beside the border (walkway/border in the overlapped image). Good thread bro.

I argue that it isn't, and that stating it is, is idiocy. Seems we're at an impasse. Either I'm a murderer or you're an idiot.

What nonsense. If you refuse to blame the nanny, there's no one else to blame in this case. First of all, treating insanity isn't my responsibility or the responsibility of other taxpayers. If you feel so strongly about helping the mentally ill, then you can donate to a charity. Secondly, you have no evidence that this would not have occurred had the nanny been receiving treatment. There are plenty of cases of mentally ill patients who were receiving treatment but still committed horrendous acts such as this.

Maybe income taxes... Corporate taxes need to keep dropping, preferably to 0%.