shoop

That is exactly what he has proposed, and exactly what he will do.

Why should FT subsidize your viewing choices? If you want to watch it, then pay for it. Problem solved...

Now that I see what Hollus means by human values. Sustainable development, adherence to international law and avoiding human rights abuses are all in the best interest of businesses. Granted some countries will get away with this things if allowed to. That is why it is the role of groups like Greenpeace, Amnesty International, etc. to put these company's feet to the fire. The best way to ensure companies are being good corporate citizens is to make a very public show of their missteps. Look at the mistakes of Nike and Kathy Lee Gifford. They were forced to change in the face of public pressure. The environment is a tricky one. We have to provide indivdual incentives (to both corporations and individuals) to help the environment. Kyoto is not the be all and end all. People need to examine the issue closely. Look at Dithers lecturing Bush during the election, yet the U.S. has come closer to meeting its Kyoto targets than has Canada. Adding three weeks to Daylight Savings Time will save on energy consumption. A positive step for the environment. The CPC encouraging mass transit use with a tax credit is another positive step. Slow and steady wins the pace.

Charest definitely has time to change his team and his image as Premier of Quebec. The Federal CPC win may have given him the boost he needs to win the next provincial election in Quebec. If he does that, he can leave provinvial politics to run again federally for the CPC after it's first majority. If Harper were to win two straight majorities he would no doubt look be looking to retire.

Why would I let you drive me off of this site?

Fair enough. But reading the first study makes a valid point. The Province quit contributing to the fund when the price of oil collapsed in 1986. Yes, it has lost pace with inflation. But Alberta couldn't afford to top it up to do so throughout the 90s. Klein balanced the budget with big cuts to the civil service, and smaller cuts to education and health care in the mid 90s. Funding for education and health had to be restored before saving for a *rainy day*. Go back and read the first study you linked to. On page 10 Warrack says something about the Alberta government not trusting the people to make their own decisions. In context it reads like an argument for reasons *not* to grow the fund. In the early 90s there was debate in Alberta about eliminating the fund to pay down the debt. Thankfully that one wasn't followed... Here is a link to oil prices in constant dollars using 2004 as a baseline. Using $30 a barrel as a rough gauge for an *oil boom* Alberta has only had three years to start rebuilding the fund. I know they *only* put in 1/4 billion this past year. But if they keep it up the fund will start growing again.

You are the one that said corporations lack the capacity to protect 'human values'. Kinda tough to debate that statement if you don't define the term. If you want to find out how capitalism is going to account for human values, best to let you define the term to begin with... I'd like to ask you the same question, and how capatilism is going to account for them.

I didn't ignore it. I just don't believe it. Point to one link that shows the value of the fund at any point in the mid-80s and I can do the calculations to adjust the figure for inflation. But I am not simply going to *take your word* for it if you are too lazy to actually provide a link. Would you believe what I remember from 20-some years ago and take it at face value?

Go to another site than. This is a board for discussing politics. Not for personal inults or *doing whatever the hell you want*... Or making blanket assumptions on who Harper will emulate without any support. P.S. Go f*ck yourself for telling me to grow up. Ix that adult enough for you...

Because he is a Federal Conservative. Why would he want that job? If he can win the next Quebec election he could be set to replace Harper down the road....

Hell no. Far too many of the *fisally consrvative* Liberals would hold their noses and vote Conservative you woud easily get a CPC minority. Start by dividing up the 54 Liberal seats in Ontario evenly between the CPC and the NDP. Then give the CPC five more seats in Quebec. Boom majority right there. How many NDP voters *wouldn't* go with Layton??? How exactly would Layton leading the Liberals lead to a majority???

I think I managed the French, but help me out. Did I read correctly in that Harper is destined to fail because "English-Canada" will refuse to recognize Quebec as a distinct society? That sounds like Parizeau merely trying to frame the debate in the best possible way for separatists. That verbiage is dead, never to be revisited. It is doubtful that soft nationalists would get caught up in the minutiae of language to Parizeau's liking. Harper will accommodate Quebecker's in the short to medium term. Then we will see what policies the parties bring forth in the next election...

There are a lot of *deservedly* negative connotations with the term neocon. However, there are a lot of supporters of the CPC that definitely aren't neocon. It is arrogant for you to automatically assume that you can insult somebody with a name that doesn't support them. Arrogant for you to be to lazy to actually look at true neocons as only party of the new CPC. Arrogant for you to dismiss honest debate with a word that automatically turns people off .... pinko!

Once again, what is with the arrogance? I understand how being a disciple of P.E.T. could lead to that, but honestly grown adults can disagree with you. That doesn't make the stupid, deluded or lacking in intelligence. But if you want to continue the personal attacks, so be it. Why so arrogant? On August 30, 1976 the Heritage Trust Fund was created with $1.5 billion dollars. In a little less than 30 years the value of the fun has gone up *8 times*. Far, far better than merely treading water. The trust fund is growing by leaps and bounds. PS, if you want to chastise me about *staying on topic* remember not to use it as a simple tool hoping I will overlook your ignorance. You could actually justify your points I have refuted before. Or you can ramble on without support in the face of the growing mound of evidence against... Indeed.

Once again, what is with the arrogance? I understand how being a disciple of P.E.T. could lead to that, but honestly grown adults can disagree with you. That doesn't make the stupid, deluded or lacking in intelligence. But if you want to continue the personal attacks, so be it. Why so arrogant? On August 30, 1976 the Heritage Trust Fund was created with $1.5 billion dollars. In a little less than 30 years the value of the fun has gone up *8 times*. Far, far better than merely treading water. The trust fund is growing by leaps and bounds. PS, if you want to chastise me about *staying on topic* remember not to use it as a simple tool hoping I will overlook your ignorance. You could actually justify your points I have refuted before. Or you can ramble on without support in the face of the growing mound of evidence against... Oil prices are extremely high when compared to historical averages, and the best we can do for a legacy is making sure that the trust fund doesn't shrink? Notice, we're not growing it, just making sure that it doesn't get smaller. Think about it....our Heritage Trust fund is merely treading water while we sell record amounts of oil at near record prices. Any claim that we're doing something meaningful for future generations with this fund is absurd. Indeed.

Drea, I must admit that the new Friedman book is on my to read list. Please, please, please explain how any of this relates to the Conservative Party of Canada. The party that has given the strongest endorsement of expanding Canada's network of free trade partners and is the most open to international investment in Canada. Maybe a different thread is in order for a tangent this far from the rest of the posts on the thread... I pretty much agree with TML's response to your earlier rant. Prayer in school? Abortion? Ultra-right wing conservative christian leader? None of these points make any sense at all. If you are just looking for a forum in which to bash Harper for purely emotional reasons, without appealing to the truth or logic in any form, I suggest you try rabble.

The fund managers are responsible for the return on the fund. IMT was talking about the return, not how much the Province tops up the fund by. So yes, the $1.1 billion dollar return this year is the correct figure to use. The *frigging thing* sits at almost 13 billion dollars and is still growing. Regardless of money they divert to general revenues. Once again, how is this *not* passing on a portion of our oil riches to future generations? Because they keep pilfering the frigging thing to top up the general revenues?

What do you consider to be *human values*? After the utter failure communism has proven to be in providing a decent standard of living everywhere it has been tried, it is time to quit railing against the evils of capitalism. Of course there need to be restraints on free markets, but this must be tempered with the recognition that Canada's high standard of living is due to the business environment in which the country's economy exists...

Typical of the laziness of the Liberals. (The laziness that cause you to lose this election ) All of your facts and assumptions are disproven yet you are too arrogant to read the link attached. For 2005-06 the fund is going to return about 8 1/2%. Guess that beats your 2 to 3 % hey? So the fund managers are allowe dot keep their jobs? Of the $1.1 Billion that 8 1/2% represents about $800 Million will go into general revenues and $300 Million will go into *topping up* the fund. Do explain how a fund that will be close to 13 billion dollars by the end of fiscal 2005-06 isn't passing a portion of our oil riches to future generations. Gee those pesky facts....

While your interpretation of events *may* have had some validity at one point in time, they are definitely not in touch with the current business environment. The costs of lawbreaking have become so high, so quickly that companies are forced to *play by the rules*. Sure there are still some corporate lawbreakers, but the examples of Enron, MCI Worldcom, Tyco and Marth Stewart Omni Media are more and more proving to be the rule rather than the exception...

Fair enough. I think you missed the point in saying the Conservatives are neutered with a minority. Just because the *Liberals* behaved as if they were neutered when they were in minority doesn't mean the Conservatives have to. There is very little chance of an election in the next 18 months. So the Conservatives can be much more assertive than the Liberals were. Besides peddling his arse to try and get every little piece of legislation passed only added to Martin's well deserved Mr. Dither's label. Don't expect to see the same out of the Conservatives. Harper has proven his ability to pull together an electoral coalition while staying true to his principles. No one thought he could that. Expect to see many similar things in parliament...

Wow, What a partisan joke you are. No ability to look at anything an *evil* party has done in a good light. Exactly how much should the fund be growing by above and beyond inflation? Why didn't you look at the link with all the financial info on the Fund before going off on your tirade? Nice personal attack on Premier Klein. How about talking about the snobby former PM you *miss* with his psychotic ex-wife? Hmmmm, personal attacks aren't that cool are they?

The fact that you are resorting to such hair-splitting tactics shows the lameness of your argument. There are plenty of doctor's practices that do no charge their patients any extra fees. So do explain how the Beresford clinic, in Layton's case, is equivalent to these practices. Weren't the Liberals supposed to be the defenders of public health care?

What? I am sure if this backlog is as big as you claim it is you could probably provide a link of some kind...

Pedantry? You really miss the point. And have no clue about the oil busines... $16 a barrel in 1993 was far above the break-even price for oil extraction. Thus, there were new wells being drilled and the economy was doing well in Alberta. $12 oil in 1993 would not have been break-even price and wells would have been shutting down. Be as ignorant as you want about Alberta and Albertans. Just remember the old adage. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Alberta represents 10% of the population of Canada. The Province deserves a little more than a *tiny bit* of the Prime Minister's time.