blueblood

And he attended without having to make a cheesy political statement in front of the entire country. Outstanding, why couldn't he do that during the men's game?

You come here and complain about people bullying you, and that your going to the mods and that they will side for you, well its a two way street. Trolling and flame baiting are also against the forum rules as well. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You want to troll and flame bait, deal with the consequences.

You know what that tells me. 1. The policy of low taxes and having low royalty rates has grown the economy and as a result grown the tax base. As a result, there is more money to spend (shudder)/cut taxes/services (yay!). Ireland has followed this policy and done very well and has done so without oil. 2. The rise of the wildrose alliance in recent years suggests there is backlash to the previous direction of the gov't to raise royalty rates and raise spending. According to Albertans on this forum, the PC's may very well take some losses because of this. 3. The fact that Eddie himself has had to backtrack and slash royalty rates because he needs to grow his economy to justify his spending. Remember the oil companies pretty much told Eddie to pound sand when he hiked the royalty rates.

When it came to deciding to grow the economy or gouge the oil companies and provide services to the urbanites, guess which side won? The provincial NDP in Alberta runs on a platform of gouging the oil companies, the people of Alberta exercised their democratic rights and the NDP never gained power there. That would be provincial NDP in this case, they do have seats in the leg, and why I said MLA's instead of MPs Or that there are scores of voters who vote for the one party over the other ones. Oh Joy, randomly placed MLA's that have no constituency to be accountable to.

They're allowed to, but in the grand scheme of things over in Alberta, they just don't matter. The royalty slash proved that.

You look in throughout European history with banks and without banks. One was poor and one has had steady growth. Guess which part had banks and which one didn't. Ed Stelmach has slashed oil revenues. By doing so he essentially flipped the bird to those expecting handouts from the revenue generated by the oilsands. Those urban people who elected NDP MLA's in Alberta, they were told to go pound sand. Ed Stelmach learned the hard way what the consequences are of messing with the "elite". The province suffered, and the elite took their money and the jobs they provided next door.

That's a good question, but we do know this. Before the renaissance, no middle class. We have nobility and peasants. Everything was stagnant, and every time Europeans tried their little war adventures out east, they got their poor, broke butts handed to them. Then the church in all of its wisdom decides to allow banking, which if my history serves me correctly the Templars used, and helped to create a vast amount of wealth/power. (Interesting to note, Friday the 13th is when all the templars got rounded up and killed by the church/kings of the day). Now with banking, we have the emergence of the middle class, more wealth being created and spent, which has led to a rapid advancement in European and eventually western civilization. That's how I connected the dots. Had we done the things some leftists want to do by taking from the nobility and "giving" the money away, I would argue we would still have nobility and peasants.

Banking has done far more for ordinary people than social programs. That's a fact. The lefties get their knickers in a knot because it's not "free" like from the government. Only those that don't matter. Ed Stelmach took it seriously and slashed the royalties. His province will now be richer because of it.

A great multitude of corporations operating in the oil patch are publically traded companies, there is nothing stopping the average joe from buying shares in the company and having his say at the annual shareholder's meeting. If you think corporations are fascist, its time to take some commerce classes. Stelmach did the good thing because that oil is worthless to him if there is nobody to pump it out of the ground. With oil being stuck in the ground there is no royalties period being gathered from the oil companies.

Ha! Are you not aware of the concept of modern banking. It's a novel idea introduced in the late middle ages. That is the number one reason why we have a higher living standard, not by governments soaking those that have money to essentially burn said money. I'd argue there is a far stronger correlation between improved standards of living and the banking system than by having a do-gooder attitude. There are more wealthy people in spite of government (capitalizing on advances of technology and a growing population), not because of it. My link The harsh effects of captilism didn't affect this guy, he cashed in on the April-January rally and made out better than Bill Gates. Ed Stelmach had the same attitude you did, the oil companies told him to pound sand, and eventually ol' Eddie folded like a cheap tent.

Welcome to the debate! The debate is what number between 1 and 100 is ideal. I am advocating a different number than you are.

You have said time and again that it is societies obligation and duty to look after the vulnerable. You have also said time and again that the wealthier owe society more than the less wealthy. That to me is being closer to socialism than capitalism. Oh but we have emulated them, we aren't commies after all.

Being a superpower, a responsibility Canada will never have. Ed Stelmach does, slash to the oil royalties! It sucks for a province when people who are gouged take their ball and go home. Stelmach has learned that lesson the hard way. We are talking about policy, you want one closer to the USSR, and I want one closer to the US. One side is a success, one side is a failure.

Looks like Steady Eddie has finally realized what happens when you try and cook the golden goose. CTV

Price they paid to speed up in getting the world rid of the USSR. I'd say it was a good investment. That is the problem with the attitude of most Canadians, we're doing just fine. Thanks to Western Canada, the country is not very negatively affected by the recession. There's always room for improvement, just not in your eyes. USSR=huge government --->fail. Yet the US is the most successful of all They had it during the American Revolution. Small gov't, typically US = still a superpower Huge gov't, the USSR - R.I.P So has the rich overthrown gov'ts. I.E. American Revolution.

The US is one of the most capitalist countries on the planet, with low taxes that pay for its gov't functions and military. They also have a large amount of poor people that are basically for all intents and purposes told to go fly a kite. Now we have the USSR, which was the opposite and gouged people for succeeding. Which side won? And its also been proven to work that less gov't involvement is better for societies well being than more gov't involvement. What about the US? Can't argue with success. Do you think that we would be successful if the upper class was constantly rising up to fight for what they wanted and needed? Nope. If we put too much pressure on the wealthy, that's where we willl be. As for the poor "rising up", a fat lot of good that does them, they're still poor. The sooner the poor realize that you can't cook the golden goose, the sooner our society becomes that more advanced.

Which is less than this current dinosaur tax system we have today. The only society that hasn't worked is the communist society that takes your do-gooder attitude and makes it central policy. The numbers don't lie, gouging people that succeed hurts far more than leaving some people impoverished. Do you think I bury my money in a hole in the ground? I support society by buying, saving, and investing. Which is far more efficient and beneficial than the bloated government and their pathetic civil service. No, "society" needs to look after itself, that philosophy of yours has been tried and failed. We have succeeded in the west not because we "help" the less fortunate, but in spite the less fortunate. We succeed in the west because we have rewarded success far more than other countries in the world. What has made western civilization more successful the acceptance of banking, or the government/church forcibly taking money and "supporting its most vulnerable"?

Oh looky here, jobs!! Western producer classifieds

Then its trim the fat time. True, but I'd still get hit with 44% on a sizeable portion. Even 40% is ridiculous. By "Canada" you mean the ones with their hands out? People do have an equal opportunity, go where the money is, there's nothing in the charter that says you are forced to stay in one spot. Not as well off as I would be with lower taxes. But people like you put it on the trolley tracks and move it closer that way. Here's the ffairness of a flat tax, everyone gets gov't services, they pay the same rate. Lower incomes are paying their fair share since they use more services than higher incomes. The higher incomes are free to spend/save/invest their money which helps inprove the economy versus having money go to the government and having a sizeable portion wasted. Outstanding. That's fair for everyone, not just the lower income earners like the rest of provincial tax set ups. So let me get this straight, I use less gov't services, but I have to pay more money than other people who use more of them because I make/spend/invest more? That is literally punishing me for contributing more and a double standard.

Better than a tax hike 29%+17.4%. Your right, they're higher. No, that's shadow accounting. Taking money from one place to another isn't creating wealth, it redistributes it. Taking my money that I earned by force because I happen to earn more than some people is punishing me for making more money. Where is my incentive to generate more wealth when people like you want to take it away from me? And that's the type of problems that put you on the trolley tracks to a collapsed country (eg USSR). In Alberta everyone pays the same provincial tax, which is most fair. Just because somebody gets ahead doesn't mean you should kick them out at the knees.

But we are on topic, you are only defending the jews when it benefits you. When you call other people anti-semetic we can say pot meet kettle.

We have your hand in the cookie jar that you are a hypocrite. Thus ruining what little credibility you have, which in turn makes your weak arguments completely useless.

If the right wing was a hockey team, Mr. Canada would have been the first one cut at tryouts. He's no right winger, he's bat s*** crazy. Ask his position on Walmart and business.

Thank you Mr. Harper. Keep at it. Says the person not paying 44%. Alberta is poorer because of it. help those by punishing others, brilliant. And society has an obligation to reward those that do succeed in order to provide incentive to be more prosperous. The Americans taught the brits that lesson. It isn't fantasy land, it's called nature, time to read up on some Darwin.

There you go confusing right wing with bat s*** crazy again...