HistoryBuff44

The stupid thing is i think the situation would be very different if they would correct the bloody seat imbalance in the house. If the socialists werent over represented right now, this couldnt happen.

how many people that "cross the floor" are re-elected. ya, i figure the nation within a nation status.

yes i read that in the textbook too, but do you really think they dont care what the electorate wants? i think its a mistake, one, they moved too soon on this, two, because the whole stimulus packages arent performing as they hoped for in the states. This is a power grab by someone who's career is dead and another who knows without something like this he will never govern. I cant wait for the block's demands to really start kicking in.

that doesnt mean its right, so soon after an election I mean, that shouldnt be allowed. It's like they dont care the canadians just decided who they wanted governing. its hardly the same thing, they had a majority didnt they? it was the people who punished them not the conservatives. you really think this will resolve anything? this coalition will falter before long and we are back to the polls anyway. I just hope when it happens that canadians really punish those parties.

yep, looks like they got about half of what people were figuring they'd get, so far 0 seats

where is the US gonna get 700 billion from? who is gonna buy that much debt from them right now? They are just gonna print it and their dollar is gonna tank. They better hope that China, Japan and southeast asia doesnt start getting the jitters about a worthless US dollar or they will start dumping the nearly 3 trillion they hold. they shoulda let those companies go bankrupt and hope that the shock wave from it is enough to get them off the track they are on. Not even the powerful US economy can bleed a trillion a year and not die. If the US tanks hard like some are saying, i dont see how canada can sail those waters unscathed. Hopefully eastern demand for resources stays high enough to keep prices reasonable.

really? spending 54 billion in 4 years, FP had an article saying the total spending promises by them is now 80 Billion, is responsible? claiming he can cover that with no new taxes is responsible? UMMM... im not, because i know that the government doesnt control the economy. Im not sure how much harper has spent from june to sept, but its nowhere near 80 billion and he definately hasnt said he can do it without it costing tax payers anything. I love how when the liberals cut the hell out of everything to save the federal government it was all noble and what needed to be done, yet when Klein did the same thing for alberta it was reckless and careless.

So i just read this in the G&M: G&M article The math doesnt seem to add up. we are currently near a deficit. Dion claims he will spend 54 Billion, introduce his green tax, but offset it with income tax cuts worth 15B a year. But if that money is excluded from the total, as he says, then where is the 54 Billion coming from? Supposedly not only will he spend that much but there will be 13 Billion in surplus. All in the next four years. How is that possible without raising the money from somewhere (ie a tax)?

The only real question i have is do people really buy that crap? I dont believe a word from any one of those commercials, no matter which party it came from. all its good for is a laugh, its quite funny the garbage they put in those commercials.

Interesting... Joseph Stalin was a socialist, he killed, in some estimates, 15 million of his own people before WW2 started in his purges, he later invaded finland on his own. He grabbed scores of people and forced them to move to newly built cities, wholly inadequate for them, around mines and factories, sounds like social problems to me. I dont think its so much left or right as it is right or wrong. the socialist dogma didnt help the coutries of eastern Europe and led to rebellion and revolution in many countries there. I think the problem is more in the system itself, political leaders promise one thing at election time but when elected to a majority there is neither a process to hold them accoutable for what they promised to do nor is there a method to immediately bounce a government that has lost confidence of the actual people, due to policies that the majority doesnt want, not just his followers (aka party members) in parliment. Since your thread was about comparing Harper to Bush... what massive economic damage did Harper cause? what 1000's upon 1000's of foreign civilian deaths did he cause?

I love election time, integrity goes right out the window. He spent a long time claiming it was so stupid and now hes gonna double it... awesome.

I still think Dion is the best thing to happen to the Cons...

Why do you believe this will solve anything? The policies in the UK are not all that different from ours, their minorities are growing just like ours are. And they certainly arent letting in rocket scientists only. One of the fears right now is the statistic saying that when the baby boomers retire there will be massive labor shortages, much of the western world is facing the same problem. That is why its hard to let in only the highly educated, were all competing for the same people and the places those people are coming from are booming thus there is more room for them to stay at home and work.

I dont think we should be too hasty to believe we understand the whole situation and condemn one side over the other. The Georgian claim is that the Russian "peace keepers" have been aiding the separatists for a long time now. The story is in the headlines now but the killing was happening for a while. I do agree that it is unfortunate that the games will be remembered also as the day a new war erupted between Russia and Georgia.

Harper wasnt foaming at the mouth, he simply saw an opportunity to get his party in power and took it, which is exactly what Dion will do. they are both playing the same political games, dont pretend like one has only malicious intent while the other is a white knight.

No, not if the PC government is trying to make penalties harsher. Also according to one of the links you posted, they enacted it as legislation (ie using the democratic process) ... not dictatorial. I dont know, i didnt ask him, but that has nothing to do with my question of what dictatorial thing did he do that is beyond the scope of the PMO. also, and i ask this honestly, what is a so-con? haha... see a completely different solution came to my mind here... they could stop breaking the bloody law by growing that crap. im just saying

why do you say authoritarian? what dictatorial thing has he done that is out of line with what the PMO is supposed to be doing?

Partaken to be sure, but ask yourself is it by choice or force? where is the option? Every nation is socialist to some degree or other; even the US. Its a question of how far down that road do you go, true and complete socialism doesnt work, it destroys the bulk of a populations' incentive and desire to excel at something of interest to them. Their beaurocracies become so inflated as to be almost useless, hence the need for near dictatorships in them to accomplish anything. He cut the guts out of programs to get the rampant deficit spending under control. now instead of spending billions on debt servicing costs that money can be used for those same programs; which are returning by the way and we dont have the debt (the oil boom just sped up the process he began).

Im sorry, but i gotta say this... this is a true socialist opinion if I ever read one... The provinces cant be trusted to look out for the interests of all? they werent supposed to... thats why they are provincial governments to look out for the interests of the provinces people. One entity trying to cover and be responsible for everything is how so many things get left undone. it's why myriads of things get lumped into the same bills and thus useless things get passed or good things dont.

Socialism is working just fine for china?? really? Seems to me there has been a lot of unrest (not talking about recent Tibet issues). In 2005 there were 87,000 recorded "public order disturbances", a 50% increase from 2003. as for their economics, it wasnt until they started letting private capitalism occur that their economy took off. the Chinese government tries to paint a pretty picture but they have plenty of issues there. I do agree that their rediculous growth rate is going to cause them more issues, right now they bring online 1 new coal power plant each week. they simply take land from farmers without compensation and tell them to move to the city and look for work. I especially got a laugh out of your last paragraph.... cause im sure life was just so much better under the liberals, did you not work when they were in power? did you suddenly switch from the job of a life time to the worst thing imaginable when they came to power? as for the country as a whole it seems to be roughly the same ol same ol; the economy goes up and down again.

maybe because the economic analysts were saying that canada would weather the US downturn just fine last year; and now are busy pulling their feet out of their mouths. Also, economics 101, when times are good the govt should tax to pay off debt so they can cut taxes when times are not so good. why do you consider debt repayment a bad thing? every 10 billion in debt we pay off is 500 million in debt servicing costs we save and so can use on the bottomless pit programs.

I agree with what your saying. Im just wondering if the govt's reaction to the predictions of economists explains their actions. Initially they were told we would be fine, so no need to stimulate the economy just keep paying off debt. Now its shown that we will not ride this out easily but they dont want to be the first government in 13 years to run a deficit. Initially i wondered if you were hinting that paying off the debt wasnt a good choice. that 10 billion paid off means 500 million in interest savings.

I respectfully disagree, debt reduction when times are good should be a priority. I think they made a good choice in not changing the rates more. Remember, many economists were saying we would weather the US downturn... right now those economists are busy pulling their feet out of their mouths. I dont think they (the govt) wanted to cut taxes more because they are worried there may be a deficit if they did; after this many years in the black, suddenly going in the red would be a definate no no.

I agree. statistically speaking those that voted represent a good sample and so had all come out and voted the results would have been similar; maybe 2-3% different.

whats interesting is that some of the stuff i have read is questioning whether, when the entire process is taken into account, the biofuel does actually produce less CO2.