Wilber

Candidates for what?

We have one, it's called a minority government. The majority (the combined opposition) have the power of life and death over the government. How can you say they don't have a vote? There have been coalitions before but first you have to get those parties to put aside their differences and work together as a government for the good of the country. The only time that ever happens is when there is a dire national emergency. Without one, they will always put their own political interests first.

Or a different electoral system.... That would be a different electoral system. What do you suggest?

When did the present government take 51B out of EI? Link please and how else do you think they should pay for the war?

Why not?

Yes, unless you want to limit it to only two parties and have no regional representation.

This guy gets it. Osoyoos is a favorite spot of ours. We have stayed in their campsite several times and it is one of the best private sites in the area. Their winery and golf course are also first class.

The one big thing that hasn't changed on either side of the border is building materials. We still measure such things as lumber, plywood, hardware, plumbing in feet and inches. We still buy 2x4's, 4x8 sheets, 3 inch nails and bolts and 1/2 inch pipe. Wiring is sized by gauge.

North American cars have been using metric hardware for at least 20 years that I know of.

It's another example of government practicing itself, something which could get someone in the private sector sent to jail.

You want pension plans to remain in surplus. It only makes sense from a companies point of view. As long as the plan is in surplus they don't have to contribute anything. Redistributing surpluses back to employees is a mistake. A lot of companies took contribution holidays during the tech boom because plans had huge surpluses. All of a sudden the bubble burst, those same plans had big deficits and the companies were unable to make them up. The market has recovered but the fact that boomers are coming up to retirement will keep the pressure on. Even if there is no chance of a government plan becoming insolvent, taking employee contributions to fund government operations amounts to nothing less than a special payroll tax on its own employees. It's a pay cut, pure and simple.

I hope you're not serious.

Alcohol, tobacco, recreational and prescription drugs can become an addiction just as heroin, crack or meth. An addiction is an addiction, it is either a disease or it is not. Legality is irrelevant.

Of course it is. If I go out and buy so called green credits and continue to consume at my present rate, I am just as big a part of the problem as I ever was. I'm just paying more for the privilege. It's the same as buying Kyoto credits, paying off others so you don't have to clean up your own act.

While employee contributions and interest are completely off limits to companies, private plans only require that employers make up shortfalls. This can become a problem if companies go bankrupt. Employees RRSP contributions are limited because it is assumed there will be a company contribution. If the company goes away, that contribution is lost while the employee has been denied RRSP contributions during their working years. Not an issue with government pension plans.

If the surplus came from employee contributions it is most definitely their money.

CBC News That fence must be really hard on the ass.

Don't be silly. You just can't go so far beyond what you are preaching in your own personal habits and not expect to take some flack for it. Stevoh is right in that we should all be thinking about the consequences of what we do and act accordingly.

It could have happened therefore it is so.

I think they have, that's why he is doing it.

There is a huge difference between living in a Yurt and consuming a 20 times the rate of your average fellow citizen. Doing so doesn't make their assertions wrong but whatever they are doing regarding public opinion doesn't exempt them from walking the walk. Isn't a primary principle of good leadership setting an example?

Buying green power to balance your consumption only means you are prepared and able to pay for your pollution. If you are consuming 20 times the average consumption and it is coming from the grid, it is power denied to 19 other "average" consumers regardless of its colour. The only way to reduce emissions is to replace emission producing sources with clean sources or reduce consumption. Simply adding clean sources to existing dirty ones because of growing demand will not reduce emissions. Installing a comprehensive solar system will save on the energy to heat the house, water etc but I imagine a system for a house with what? 26 rooms including 8 bathrooms could run in the triple digits. A responsible thing to do I suppose but one who consumes at that level could hardly call themselves a conservationist.

They are not irrelevant but there are those who are not prepared to accept a hypothesis based on a hypothesis as the gospel. An educated opinion based on observations, yes, The gospel, no. It is the messengers who are being embraced, more and more without being questioned.

Then again Harper didn't go out of his way to preach to others about the perils of over consumption. Then again, when Gore was VP, his jet was Airforce 2, a B747.

Given the CIA's history it doesn't really surprise me they are hiring some shady groups with dubious motives to try and destabilize the Iranian regime but if there is a reference to Al Qaeda in your link, I missed it.