blueblood

Oh boy, two partisan tinfoil hat hackjob sites and a time magaizine article stating the obvious that the gov't won't collect as much tax dollars as it did if it kept taxes higher (Brilliant deduction!!) Why the hell does the gov't need to be wallowing in cash? That's not only nonsense, that's evil. Tax cuts aren't supposed to boost gov't revenues, they are supposed to make every individual a little wealthier as the gov't does not forcibly take as much money. Tell me, how am I better off with PMPM's ponzi spending scheme than with Harper's tax cuts?

No shit sherlock, that's why the gov't is planning on opening the floodgates for spending. What the people want, the people get.

Reducing taxes are a great thing. If you think the gov't can spend money better than yourself, donate your paycheck to the gov't of Canada. Aug. 1991 is right, should we be throwing money around for the sake of throwing it around? Our biggest customer can't afford to pay for our products, what do you think was going to happen to our economy? BTW our economy is not as bad as some other places in the world. PMPM's election campaign was all about bribing Canadians with their tax money. Gov't spending would have went through the roof, and the country and businesses would be a lot poorer because of it. PMPM's spending policies would have been disasterous if he were PM for any longer in this economic environment.

It's called being a politician. They tend to look at these things called polls and make judgements about what people want. Successful politicians in Canada really tend to look at the polls. Polls say Canadians want the gov't to do something to stimulate the economy. Surprise surprise the gov't did something. Do you think a cheapskate like Harper likes doing that? No of course not, but he's a politician with an election to win. I'm saying I'm in agreement with Aug. 1991 on this issue. Slash taxes and slash spending. I'm saying Harper was wrong, he didn't think the gong show economy would do so bad as to garner a deficit when he made his prediction a year ago. However Harper has made preperations to soften the blow as best as we can. Those preparations were enough, no we have simpletons running around pulling their hair out saying we need the gov't to open the taps. This may come as a shock to you, but public opinion is a big part in determining public policy. This seperates Harper from say GWB.

Yet the left was screaming and pulling their hair out in the election about the gov't not wanting to do anything or enough. Be carefull for what you wish for...

Yes because him being a civil servant results in him knowing nothing about political things...

White trash deals crack at street level the same as everyone else, one episode of cops or to serve and protect will put that myth to rest. Then there is the Southern US, plenty of white trash there...

Who cares? Theodore Roosevelt never wore a lapel pin either...

What a load of nonsense. Skids come in all shapes, sizes, and colors. Racial profiling has nothing to do with it, it's skid spotting. If a skid is a certain color, well that's just coincidence. There are also white criminal organizations as well as "colored" ones. Biker gangs and the mafia come to mind. Sorry, skids come in all shapes and sizes.

I don't think so now, he hasn't got the electorate fired up enough still. Ignatieff has properly countered Harper's move in this big chess game and the polls are now status quo.

The polls are just like grain prices in this day and age, first sign of trouble and its off to the races. Looks like we are back in the holding pattern that's been for the last 3 years...

What I don't get is why we have to spend it over 4 years. This is why I am not a fan of firehose spending that the prev. Liberals did, and now unfortunately the tories are doing.

But, most economists have been suggesting that the recession will end late this year, early next year. I have a feeling in my bones other parties are suggesting deficit financing for a set period of time too. The question is, can we afford 160 billion dollars over 4 years?

160 billion? I'd have to ask for a cite on that to see this for myself... Tory brass would pull their hair out if they had a PM who put us through a 160 billion dollar deficit.

Society pays for the negative effects of drug use, be it laziness, support to organized crime, and other potential health effects. The drugs/prostitutes are the hot stove, and the burning is jail. The added consequence of going to jail deters use of drugs and prostitution. Not all buy into that and your an example of it, however there are others that do. If you can't see that, you should get out more. A burnt hand is a punishment. Last time I checked having a burnt hand sucks and so does jail. Don't want a burnt hand, don't touch the stove. Same goes with illegal activities and jail. There is no different standard of justice. Conrad black had the best lawyers in the world, and he went to jail. Same goes with skiddies, a lot of the time the free lawyer they get will get them off. Some lawyers do have ethics and ideoligies as well, some good ones are fine with taking a wage to help out poor people. Take off your tinfoil hat. My ability to project a logical argument is just fine. Your ability to project a non-tinfoil hat argument isn't.

Higher oil prices are good news for canada. Let the price go up. Obama wants full steam ahead on any energy alternatives, including ethanol, solar, wind, nuclear, etc. Our policy in Canada should be getting away from manufacturing junk cars, to exporting energy, which we have in spades.

Touche, that's funny right there.

1) No it's not OK, if you do a crime you are rolling the dice. Good lawyers lose sometimes as well, it's up to a judge and jury. If your lawyer sucks or there is overwhelming evidence, off to the clink you go. How's Conrad Black doing? Tinfoil for everyone!!! 2) The burning in itself is punishment. Some people will comit crimes whether you tell them or not. It depends if they like getting "burned" by the justice system or not. Some do, some don't. 3) Two as far as dealing with you.

Wow another brain fart. He who breaks the law goes to the clink, rich, poor, conservative, Liberal. Nice to see you found another tinfoil hat.

That's what I meant when I said for all intents and purposes. The CWB however is Churchill's largest client, without grains going through there, Churchill would be just another Northern Town. The CWB does however own a lot of grain, as liquid an asset as that might be. How much grain the CWB owns depends on the diehards that support it and the softies such as myself would be willing to contribute if the price is right. Churchill is a port, it is of better strategic value to pop up a military base where it is closer to the waters that are under contention and closer to Islands the Danes want to snap up. Other than that there is no reason why Churchill shouldn't have a military base. However, it is clear that that port needs to roll. This ridiculousness of having to load ships on two occassions is hurting our exports that go east. Send them North and it's one stop shopping.

A weather malfuncion in Canada is not good for us, a weather malfunction in other areas of the world is better. Canola is linked directly to soybeans, when they go up so does canola. A weather malfunction in the US and South America would be ideal right now. The last thing any gov't in Canada needs is a farm disaster in the middle of a recession. So far it has pretty much made up its big loss on monday. It has it's ace in the whole concerning Churchill. That in all intents and purposes is the wheat boards main asset. I for one would love to see Churchill go full bore and put an end to that ridiculous St. Lawrence Seaway rip off. With the incoming European Free Trade Agreement, that opens up the door to Canola oil exports, and with two crushers going up full steam ahead, we can get around their GMO nonsense. I do think however a priority for the 3 prairie provincial gov'ts should be to get Churchill up and running as soon as possible. This business of going thru mountains and through Ontario is killing everyone with shipping costs.

By saying that Mexico shouldn't have Ontario jobs, where oh where do you think Mexicans are going to get money from, the money tree? God forbid a company wants to give poor Mexicans a hand up. What do you think Mexicans should do, lie around poor begging for money? But in your sick world view, Ontarians should get all the jobs, no matter how incompetant and how expensive they are and to hell with Canadian consumers and to hell with making lives better in a third world country. I happen to think a richer Mexico is in Canada's best interest.

The Conservative Gov't is looking out for Canadian consumers and taxpayers. Last I checked there were more of us than lazy autoworkers. The Canadian gov'ts first priority is to its taxpayers and consumers, not some extortionist autoworkers. Those particular Canadian jobs are screwing over fellow Canadians to the point of extortion. Why should Mexican's suffer because some elitists want crappy cars built by overpaid incompetant buffoons. Richer Mexicans benefits Canada by richer people buying our other products, and our consumers benefit by not being gouged.

Thats up to the judge and jury. Either the lawyer sucks or he doesn't. A good lawyer would get them off. So they pass penalties to make lawmakers look good? So when they made the penalties for robbing a bank it was to make lawmakers look good? I think it was to punish the criminals and disuade potential bank robbers, just like with prostitutes. Some won't become one to stay out of jail and will find work elsewhere or become a "gold digger", some or most won't care two whits about the law and become prostitutes anyway and take the risk of jail time. The point being, some are disuaded. That's a matter of opinion on which laws are worthless or not, if a few prostitutes are kept off the streets due to the fear of going to jail, the law did it's job. If you can't see that punishment disuades some people from doing bad things, then why don't you see children repeatedly touching a hot stove? Score 1 for team blue, thanks for coming out.

My floor of 400 dollars per tonne has only been crossed briefly then shot back up. So far the price has been see sawing just above 400 dollars per tonne since September. I'm pretty sure that's the floor. The demand is there. When the price goes under 400, the trucks stop rolling. It's safe to say its holding, and the ag economists are saying we are one weather malfunction from another price upshoot. Ag has not been hit as hard in this recession as say metals, and oil. Which is good news for Canada as we do a lot of ag exporting. Long term the demand is there, that's why they've scaled back the work force and haven't dismantled any mines and plants. That is a good thing. And I defy you to go to the western producer open forum and make that claim. No CWB supporter on there has made that claim and the debate there has been raging for years and is heated. I would love to see the rebuttal to that from the tory mp and the various free market associations. As one of the majority of option 2 voters, I'd like to know my vote wasn't wasted. Us option 2 voters want as much marketing options as possible, and if that means going into the pool from time to time then so be it.