blueblood

The thing is that $1.75 per year adds up. Lets say 15 million people vote, that's $26,250,000 spent on political parties that could be spent on something useful, or given back to the Canadian people. This is gov't waste of the highest order. The parties can raise their own money.

I don't know if Baghdad is a quagmire anymore...

And how well did our economy do during that time and how much better after?

Those top few guys deserve that money. They take all the risk and make all the decisions. Not only that they have loads of experience and credentials. Some people make more money than others boo hoo. Instead of dipper supporters bitching about it, how about they get their ass to school, or get their ass to work. By charging corporations less it allows them to spend more money, which results in more jobs all around. The revenue is made up from increased taxes on dividends and income from the shareholders of the corporation, the income taxes from the jobs created, and the sales tax from the crap that everyone buys. If the poor want services from the gov't, the poor can bloody well pay for them.

Holy crap you are bat s*** crazy. This is why people shy away from the tories, it's moonbats like you who want us all to live under martial law and state control like 1984 that ruin it for the rest of us. Were you happy Trudeau had the military parading around the streets and invoked the war measures act? If Russia is such a great country and Canada is turning into a "socialist quagmire" why don't you emigrate there and see for yourself how great it is. You've lost so much credibility it's gone into integers.

That would be all they could get away with because any other tampering with taxes would result in a definite hike, and there's the political reality of having to deal with that come election time. Then there is some of the potential spending the Liberals might want to do. PMPM had a boat load of ideas just prior to being punted. The 90's were an ideal situation to cut costs. A divided opposition for the better part of the decade to prevent paying the price at the polls, and not to mention the fact that Canada basically had a gun to its head to do something about its finances. I can't see a situation developing like that in quite some time.

The only benefit I see from income tax cuts are the benefit of saving. Sure you can make your money and throw it in the bank, but you can't spend it. You can make more with interests, and investments, but you still cant spend it if you want to enjoy the tax cut. It's like being out on a dinghy out on the ocean and marvelling how much water you have at your disposal, but its useless to you. The GST is indirectly an income tax in itself. To get the best benefit out of tax cuts, both have to be cut.

It's less problematic if you like to stash it in the bank and not spend it.

The thing is, parties that invoke massive changes often take a bath at the polls. Trudeau and Mulroney are evidence of that. Chretien was able to get the PMO majority with similar polling numbers to Harper due to more parties in the house. Chretien was able to get away with his slashes because of a battered and divided opposition. That and it was time to pay the Piper for Trudeau's grand experiments in gov't spending.

And that's why 22 people think he blows ass at arguing! Good old Waldo, do as I say, not as I do.

I am in the borderline small-medium business tax bracket depending on what year I have. That cut that Harper was planning on implementing was going to help me significantly if I had a good year and made too much money. 30% is better than 27% MB corporate income tax got whittled down to 11% (fed+prov.) for small business, yay!! That looks like an incentive to buy iron if I ever saw one. Anyhoo, the tax freeze isn't good for shareholders, those being a large portion of the population of the country because that dividend cheque is going to be smaller...

While at the same time punishing those companies for succeeding by raiding their profits.

I agree, well in effect we already have 2 tier health care, we just book it to the USA and BC2004 counts off license plates. 2 tier would help ramp up the demand for employees, which would increase spaces at Universities/community colleges. Also look at private insurance companies getting on board with this. 2 tier would be a dream for them, all the premiums and none of the risk. For those that say 2 tier health can't work, why does 2 tier education working? It's provincially funded and requires a lot of gov't intervention, and so on and so forth. The fact that we lose millions of dollars by people going to the US for care they want because of some soviet ideology is madness.

Then there's this beauty by Clinton in 1992 from wiki It was the poor who drove the housing bubble. They bought houses that they couldn't afford. They could have chose to rent, but their sense of entitlement got the better of them. The US and the world is poorer because of it.

Optics and a sound bite. The only thing the university is at fault is for the gong show that happened under their watch. She cancelled her speech because it is language to an audience that "things are so bad here, and things are so dangerous, I can't speak because I fear for my safety". Her cancelling the speech in response to the letter and the protestors (I heard 2000 from CBC news, but that's irrelevant) gave her audience the impression that if you have ideas contrary to leftist views, they will try and silence you through intimidation and thuggery. Whether this actually happened or not is a non issue, what does matter is that she gave the impression that it did happen and sold her audience on it. The whole mess at U of Ottawa is Coulter's speech. She didn't even need to get up on stage and she still got the jist of it out to her audience, not only that it was far more effective than any of her speeches could ever be. Exactly, and quite a few people are and according to that CTV article more people than anticipated. The University sent a controversial letter, and gave the green light for the circus to come into town. They look like clowns. Notice how U of Western Ontario and U of C kept their traps shut, Coulter has no ammo against them.

So? Her goal is not being a free speech advocate, its poking leftists in the eye. Is she a hypocrite - yes Is she a fool - yes Did she succeed in having the left in a tizzy over one of its supposed pillars - yes She will use the free speech card when it suits her. From CTV.ca That's how you deal with a person like Coulter.

Not to mention making the University and its student's look like clowns, and delivering her point without making a speech. She has in essense made her speech in Ottawa. She did it in a calculated way, and made her opponents look like fools. From CTV.ca ctv

You of all people should not be saying that 22-7 anybody?

When the cops suggest to do something, its a good idea to listen to them. Riverwind articulates my exact position on climate change, and does so better than I can. Why should I waste bandwidth saying the same thing twice? Judging by my poll the only non-issue is your pathetic debating skills. Your idea of debate is shouting down people who disagree with you, and name calling, hoping to silence others through intimidation and thuggery. You suck at debate and the results speak for themselves. The only thing I have to articulate is that you and others like you are pathetic at debating. And I have done that in spades. 22-7 people think you are a horrible debater, the numbers don't lie. In your eyes anyone who poses an idea opposite to yours gets shouted down as a "denier" or a "fascist" and you don't debate their arguments. I will keep touting that poll whenever you think you "pwn" someone in a debate by shouting them down and calling them a "denier" and/or a "fascist". And another thing 28 people out of 29 understood the poll. 97% of respondents are smarter than you are. There's dumb and then there's you. Your idea of debate is shouting down people in an effort to silence them. You are no better than those protesters who feel the need to shout down and intimidate because somebody has an idea that is different. You engage in personal attacks on Climate Change skeptics and try to make them look like fools, I made a poll about your debating skills, and have made you look stupid. Mission Accomplished. Nope, and various critics agree with me.

The protesters had as much right to yak and spew nonsense the same as Coulter did, but that's not the point. The point is that these protesters engaged in "debate" similar to our lead IPCC cheerleader. That style being to shout down anyone that disagrees with them and thus silencing the debate, hell lets throw intimidation and thuggery in there to boot since you obviously condone that behavior. As we can tell by my favorite poll, that style of debate is completely useless. (22-7, ouch). We have reports from the protesters themselves that they compromised security, and the lecture had to be shut down from advice from the police. By being suggested to shut down the lecture from police, Coulter makes her point without having to speak. Had those students gone on the news the next day and ripped her apart, the students would have had a far easier time convincing people to gravitate to their cause. Ann Coulter has made the UofO and their various student associations the laughing stock of the free world.

Well done sir.

Damn!! Touche. Oh well 22-7 for the good guys...

Everyone already knows that Waldo and Wyly are horrible at debating. I already proved that little experiment. No need to waste bandwidth by telling them what has already been established.

Our "free speech" has some interesting variations. Some people slip through the cracks on both sides. You should hear how some MP's refer to long gun owners during question period. Par for Coulter's course as far as I'm concerned. On the trolley tracks towards the USSR and Venezuela.

Your not seeing the forest for the trees. As you have said, "The University" says yes or no to an event taking place. We both no that the organizers didn't simply roll into a random hall on campus and decided to have a lecture by Ann Coulter. "The University" shoulders some of the blame for the gong show that has taken place, they had the power to say yes or no. They decided to let the Ann Coulter express come through and now have to deal with a trainwreck. If the University didn't want to deal with this fiasco, they could have turned the group down long ago and that would have been the end of it. They made the choice to permit this event, now they have to live with it.