Slavik44

you make it sound as if every oen in alberta is un-able to afford to live in an apartment. Not only that but you make it sound like there is a high percentage of financially prudnet people with out a place to live in alberta. So I went looking, and found that a good majority of apartments in alberta fall between $500-$1,000 obviously it is not scientific, but that is what i found in the few minutes I looked, $6,000 to $12,000 a year. Obviously this does not leave a huge amount of money to live off of but clearly if in ten seconds i can find 80 apartments available in this price range, a finanacially responisble, hard working employed albertan can do just as well, and not only that but they could manage to live off of that. Personally i wonder how financially responsible these employed homeless people are, obviously there is a human element to this, and when dealing with a human element their will be imperfections. Could it be ciggarettes? alcohol? keeping up a good impression? I am not sayign that what they go through is fair, but i find it hard to belive that there is an abundance of employed homeless people in alberta, especially considering alberta has one of the lower poverty rates in Canada. If there is such an abundance perhaps government funded financial counseling for these people may better suit their needs, and then we can move on to government sponsered co-ops.

well obviously there is bias in the news, but it really hasn't rubbed me the wrong way. Next it is tough for me to anylize bias..look at MS...he basically has said that there are no news sources that are over the top NDP, but if you look at hsi non-biased ones...most of us woudl say they are over the top NDP. He lsits them as un-biased as the speak to what he says. It is easy to recognize what is biased agaisnt you but always hard to admit what is biased in your favour. You want a list, look at the T.V guide or a newspaper stand take down their names, they are biased.

takeanumber, that is absolutley not true. Perhaps the conservatives, recognizes the fact that in many cases fixing poverty needs to be micromanaged to a great extent. The federal government better serves as a macro manager. Infact the best thing to do would be to let cities fight poverty and just supply them money to do so. You cannot solve poverty in Vancouver from ottawa it doesn't work. Ottawa is busy enough stealing money from Canadian citizens, and as jack layton says killing them. Perhaps it is best to leave the organization behind fixing poverty to a local level, because it sure as hell has yet to work at a federal level. There are only 24 hours a day and if the federal government starts to micromanage what goes on everywhere you will run into problems, fighting poverty must be fought at all three levels of governments, but the organisation and workload as well as the initiative falls on the city and the people who liv ein the city, the best the federal government can do is supply them with money...it cannot do there job for them and succeed.

no seriously it isn't funny... this would be funny, A kid goes to his dad and asks, "Dad, what are politics?" His dad replies, " Put it this way; I am the breadwinner of the family so I am capatilism. Your mom is the owner of the money so she is government. The government is the provider for the people so you are the people. Your baby brother will be the future, and the nanny is the working class. Now think about that." So he went to bed. He was woken by his brother. The baby had pooped in his daiper. He went to tell his parents, but he only found his mom asleep in the bed. He didn't want to wake her, so he went to the nanny. The door was locked. He checked through a hole and saw the dad in bed with the nanny. He went back to bed, frustrated. The next morning, he went to his dad and said, "Dad i know what you mean now." "You do? Tell me." "Well, dad, while capitalism is screwing the Working Class, The government is sound asleep, the People are being completely ignored and the Future is in deep sh1t. If he wants to be funny thats great, watch jay leno he can copy soem of his lines, maybe put out an alert that canadian authorities are on the look out for a suspected a lqueda terrorist named Izhit mypants. Unfortunantley this top 10 list is not bootylicious.

Let's not. This statement really reminds me what Conservatism is all about. Let a white man decide how the country should be run. Despite what Conservatives think, women and minorities count. And they pay taxes too. (Which I know some Conservatives hard a time with that idea, because according to some here, all immigrants are welfare bums.) nice pathetic stereotypes, look at the situation. You assume that official billiangualism is working right now, i belive canada is considered one of the biggest French speaking nations in the world. However it isn't, sure i know how to say lowers cholesterol in french..but that doesn't make me French. Every oen in Canada has the right to service in French and English, however there is a huge difference between being able to recieve service in english and French, and forcing public servants to learn french is redundant. As long as there is some one available and on hand in French who can help you, you can offer service in both French and English. Look at the Canadian foriegn service, you msut speak both official languages fluently, if oyu don't they will give you 80% of your starting salary as a living allowance while you learn to speak English/French fluently. Again over the top there, as long as there is a suficient amount fo peopel on hand to keep operations running smoothley in both official languages...there is nothign to worry about. Next thing I want to discuss are these comments: 1.Let a white man decide how the country should be run. 2.Despite what Conservatives think, women and minorities count. 3.according to some here, all immigrants are welfare bums. I think that if put to a referendum I think that if put to a referendum I think that if put to a referendum I think that if put to a referendum I think that if put to a referendum refurendum:The submission of a proposed public measure or actual statute to a direct popular vote. No where do i see the statement that only white men can vote in referendums. Is democracy not the rule of the people, not jsut certain people but all people. However what you propose is for archaic, in that you wish to exclude the average Joe from decision making, you said it yourself in response to letting the Average joe run canada..you said lets not. Seeing as how the AVERAGE Joe, is average, he woudl be a proportional representation of this country, make about $30,000, have a family, face every day problems, it wouldn;t really matter what colour his skin is, it wouldn;t really matter what his gender is perhaps we could call this person average Jane if you like. Of course you flat out deny the rule of the average Joe/Jane/Lee/Gill/pierre so the question is what is your alternative, the rule of just jane? the rule of just gill? youll find that when looked at this way, that the one being exclusive is infact you, the one infact ignoring the average tax payer is in fact you, and the one being hipocrtical is, yes, in fact YOU.

here is the link, http://www.canada.com/national/features/de...66-4d396b824bce

in the vancouver sun today, an article put the conservatives at 20 seats in B.C can't remember the rest, sorry. But really predicting B.C is a crap shoot....there are liek 3 places you can predict fairly acuratley right now, Alberta, Quebec, and Atlantic canada. The praries are starting to shape up, but things keep changing in B.C and Ontario.

yea so lets all shoot up on herione and let God take care of everything. Get real, this whole canada is not a buisness thing is getting old and frankly it is annoying. Obviuosly canada is not a buisness, if it were we would have ceased to exist years ago, so thank god for that. honestly there is nothign wrogn with being smart about how we run thsi country, and if we are wasting money, thats not smart. If were losing money, thats not smart. If inflation is troubling are buisness, thats not smart. If 7% of our workers don't work, thats not smart. If the value of are products fluctiate constantly, thats not smart. Maybe Canada isn't a buisness, but that is no reason for us to be stupid. If it takes making caanda more like a buisness to be smarter and more efficient so be it. I don't care if we have to run Canada like a zoo as long as it works, but whats going on right now doesn't work, and hoenstly the current system of billangualism doesn't work.

unfortunantley there are no liberals on this site, or atleast these forums, I mean look at this sites poll...to bad they weren't acurate then we could end up with a conservative majority, NDP offical opposition, with the green party and liberals as bottom dwellers. Thankfully ontario is switching away from the libs. the people you should be trying to talk sense into is the residents of atlantic canada 61% liberal support, heck maybe we all should steal money from them, seems like a great way to make friends.

No and yes, the 18-20% of people who support the NDP support the comment..so he won't loose support over it, but he may not gain support.

any one ever think that perhaps this could hurt the party? Think abou tit, I woudl probabley be correct in thinking that sepratists vote for the bloc, right? So if sepratist vote for the bloc, then the pro-canada would vote for the libs, Con's, NDP. So perhaps by appealing to the speratists and the bloc, the push away their own voters. Logically a speratist will vote for a primary sepratist party, and a unionist will vote mainly for a national party, perhaps all they have doen is confuse the electorate in quebec and lost votes.

I have looked at them, even got there site bookmarked, mind you i got the NDP bookmarked as well. However it is nice to see a left wing party commited to having a millitary.

uhmm... the conservatives are down 25% in alberta? did you ahh...make an eror there?

we could just make the liberals leave then we would all be happy. However i don't think a con. majority would make quebecers want to leave canada. If oyu look at the BQ, they simple seem to be a pro-quebec party now and less of a sepratist party. I mena i remember hearign their paltform makes no huge mention of soveriegnty. The idea of seperation is also declining in the polls. So who knows but i doubt Quebec will hold another referendum on seperation, yes there is always the possibility they could but, it seems unlikely from perspective right now. in the west it is even much more unlikely as whiel peopel talk about it, it is more of a joke, and next most don;t ahve the guts to go through with it. so i vote none of the above.

The NDP shoudl stick to proposals like this, "It proposes to change the income-tax system so no Canadians earning less than $15,000 would pay taxes." the amount of people that earn 15,000 is low and the money the government gets from income tax on thsoe people is low, but it would make a big enough difference in the persons life to be a bit of a help. Unfortuanantley no, instead they want to push on a tax for rich people dumb enough to die. next it doesn;t amtter how many benificiaries there is on the inherritiance, making it entirley possible that, numerous middle class families from big citieswoudl just squeek in to this tax, which worries me. Personally if you are goign to tax the rich for dieing atleast make sure they are truely rich and put the tax in place only if 1 single person recieves over 1.2 million. This woudl block out most middle class families that moved into a booming are in housing, it woudl block out again middle class families by ensuring that the parents truley are rich (if you can give 1.2 mill to just 1 person it can be assumed tha tyou are rich). So if you are going to tax the rich for dieing please make sure they are 100% rich, and not just lucky middle class families.

----------------------------------------------------------- The Bloc had 52 per cent support among Quebec respondents, while the Liberals were next with 35 per cent. The Conservatives and NDP were well back at at eight per cent and three per cent, respectively. ---------------------------------------------------------------- this has nothign on the surface to do with B.C, it has to do with quebec; but i want to make a point with it. Just a few days a go, maybe a week, there was a post that suggested the cons were at 10% in quebec and the NDP was at 15% and in less then 7 days(?) the NDP have lsot 13% of their support in quebec. The other alternative is that whiel the error margine of a national poll is normally with in 3% of peoples opinions on a whole, it cannot be used to acurately determine regional swing, and the error margin by region is much higher then 3%. Well either that or quebec is a political hotspot where people are palying a game of muscial chairs this election; hey thats kinda like B.C. So in the end it may be a bit of both but to read a NDP sweep of B.C is a foolish. Just a while ago when the cons were at 35-40% in B.C people commented hwo we were in trobule in B.C and may not even get 20 seats. The NDP now has 36% and we ae told to expect the NDP to sweep B.C. yeah right......................

Seriously why don't the right wingers believe in freedom of expression? ---------------- Perspective, What soemone may view as expression, a right winger may view as something entirely different. Take abortion (PLEASE NOTE I DO NOT WANT TO DEBATE ABORTION,SO DO NOT TRY, I SIMPLY AM USING IT AS AN EXAMPLE) a right winger views abortion as murder, so from their perspective they are not limiting or controlling what other's do, just up holding the laws of the land. Take dancing around in the street naked, a left winger may view that as freedom of expression, where as a right winger may view that as Causing an un-neccasary public disturbance. the Left can look at it their way and the right their way. However to say that they don;t belive in freedom of expression is wrong, they simple view things from a different perspective. When viewing fromt hat perspective it is not seen as "controlling" other people, "limiting" peoples freedoms, or holding a double standard. ----------------------------- There are people here that post much more often, and yet because they are right wing, people like Kliege say nothing about their posting frequency. Double standard, you bet. -------------------- uhmm...what does posting frequency have to do with anything? you make no sense here and have seem to gone off on soem sort of side rant to coem up with a double standarad. perhaps you coudl explain thsi oen further. As it appears to be a few lines of mindless ramblings. ------------------------------

uhhmm....honestly...to be clear. Jack layton has been saying this ever since he beat bill for the NDP leadership....its nothing new.

yes I want this man to be are P.M.... When it comes down to a thief, oh he didn't know about it, so i guess my choice is between an: *Incompetent leader *troubles with sustanability or *words taken out of context it really isn't much of a choice.

I would actually agree with you on this one, the question is would you have to get that bill to pass throguh senate?

yes but in the name of equality. A white male needs to score 86% on a police aceptance test and a brown male needs to score just 67%, no this isn't religoius disrimination, but it is racial discrimination. you say prospective citizens should be free of discrimination well what about all citizens? I ahve nothing wrong with immagrints and i ahve nothing wrong with helping them get on their feet in this new country to them, but we should not have to discriminate agaisnt are own population to accomidate them.

sex=14 drive=16 vote=18 I can have sex, i can drive, maybe I could have sex and drive at the same time but i sure as h*ll can't vote...yep we got our priorities straight.

just the other day i did soemthinking about that...I had the exact same results you did

the NDP will certianly get alot of seats, I can see them gettign atleast 20. Which if you think about it is alot more then they got last election. But i don;t think any one, or rather most people expect the NDP to get 50 seats, it has really always been 20-30 seats. Of course in a recent article I saw them project 12-16 seats or somethign so.....

well only 47% of lib. voters in quebec are set in stone (according to a poll) unfortunantley even if you got a good portion of that 40%, it would just give the bloc another seat...but i guess you never know...but it is highly unlikely the cons or NDP will get a seat, unless their support is focused in jsut a few ridings.