blueblood

The Conservatives have had this same plan since the beginning of their term. They have not enacted any of it. In fact, they look to dismantle the marketing boards like the Wheat Board. At some point, farmers will have to decide who actually has the better plan. For many years they have supported the Tories. If the Wheat Board is the first to go following other marketing boards, I think you will see where the Conservatives stand. I know the tories aren't following this plan as well, that sucks for me. They're dismantling the wheat board as well which blows too. This is the part of the party that I don't agree with. I and most other rural Canadians agree with the rest of their policies. The Liberals had 13 years with their "plan" what did we get out of it, this whole calamity and a screw the west attitude. Whose left, the NDP well they are a little too radical for our liking and most of us don't agree with their policies. Looks like I have to hold my nose and vote Tory and hope the crisis doesn't get worse. Honestly I'm not too hard done by the crisis, I've had to diversify income and the old lady works, but I'm worried about the neighbour down the road...

In the event of a crisis the gov't should intervene, this is a crisis it affects a lot of the country and solving it would be good for the country, most of the stuff it gets involved in (Day Care) is not a crisis. Well it's a hell of a lot better in doling out cheques which is what your all about, with the gov't getting involved for this little bit because of the market imbalance which results in this calamity is a good thing, if it leads to our being independant, if they go through with these measures you won't be hearing from us again. Funny thing is the measures in the document are CHEAPER than handing out cheques, sets up business that turn into co-ops, and in turn creates a powerful industry in rural Canada. But since it's not the Liberal way of writing a cheque and hoping the problem goes away, it's BS. The gov't is involved in the oil industry heavily, but in a way that encourages development, involved in fisheries, involved in the lumber industry. Do you hate it when the gov't tries to help industry and solves problems and gets results? That's where the gov't should stick it's nose, not in our culture, morals, traditions that is where society should take care of itself. What exactly is the crisis here? Farming is not as profitable as it used to be. That's not a crisis (for you it may be) but that's just a normal part of economic development. Some industries become obsolete and die off and others grow in their place. In the 21st century, it is a much bigger crisis to have 1 in 3 citizens without a high-school diploma but according to you the government should butt out and leave this crisis unattended. That's over 30% citizens with bleak future vs 2% in a bad industry. Your "crisis" is nothing in comparison to the dropout crisis. You have to remember that conservative ideology dictates that government should not get involved in anything (aside from defense, sending out cheques and giving tax breaks). This government will not get involved in your so called "crisis". You can't pick and chose when government should get involved - just to save your butt but nobody else's. You want "to take care of yourself", then do so and stop whining that the government has to get you out of trouble. This is not the end of farming, it is the end of small producers. Industries consolidate all the time and nobody (beside you) will even notice that anything has changed. A crisis is that due to Liberal policy there are farmers going out of business and having to flock to the city and plug up the welfare system and add more population and more stress to the city, keep us in the country and it helps everyone. Hmm, if a farmer had more money he'd be able to pay more tax, do you know what the GST on a new combine is? its a lot more than some people's income tax return. Us small producers is why your food is so cheap at the store, just remember that the next time you buy something, I'd hate to see how much food would cost if Tyson foods gobbled up all the land in Canada. There is a potential for a profitable industry here but its people like you who despise rural Canada that keep holding us back, and you wonder why there is a Bloc Quebecois. I'll say again when an industry is threatened, gov't should get involved, not in moral, idealogical, cultural, traditional aspects, that's where society can protect, society can't protect us. Why are you against rural Canada having a profitable industry, why should it be only Ontario that has profitable industry, are we your serfs? If there weren't multinationals stealing our produce we wouldn't ask the gov't for anything, we are too small. For the school thing you'd rather have people held back so they conform to a certain vision, sorry not everyone conforms to the "Liberal vison" What would you like all the farms to be Wal-mart like and the workers get minimum wage? Sounds like it and from the sounds of things your against small business. We had a good system, if it ain't broke don't fix it - THAT'S true conservative idealogy, well I would say our system was good but the big boys from out east wrecked it. Keep the production end small and have us all competing with each other, that will keep the price down. Good grief if it weren't for government intervention the entertainment and recording industry would go belly up (copyright laws anyone!!) why should they get benefits and not us? Why are you against the average person getting ahead? Just because a lot of people don't have a university degree they're automatically doomed to failure, that's crap and you know it. With the plan outlined in the Doc, we CAN have a profitable industry and we'd never have to bother the gov't again. Imagine if there was a plan like that to deal with homeless people. But guys like you would like to hold us back and just write us cheques and hopefully the problem will solve itself, and you wonder why the west is Tory blue. You seem to hate the government sticking up for industry which benefits working Canadians the most, but god forbid if they go after Day Care or some other social program. We're looking for a hand up, not a hand out. This is why Canada is ungovernable, we out here cannot have people from Ontario deciding our fate, they just don't understand.

Can you recall what the response Wayne Easter had to the proposal back then? I know that the current policy of the Liberals is to support the Wheat Board. They also said they were going to set up a rural affairs ministry. I don't know how they are responding to the rest of the NFU's proposals. How are the Tories responding? They're both crapping out on the response part unfortunately. I don't know his response, most likely "we'll get back to you..." In the event of a crisis the gov't should intervene, this is a crisis it affects a lot of the country and solving it would be good for the country, most of the stuff it gets involved in (Day Care) is not a crisis. Well it's a hell of a lot better in doling out cheques which is what your all about, with the gov't getting involved for this little bit because of the market imbalance which results in this calamity is a good thing, if it leads to our being independant, if they go through with these measures you won't be hearing from us again. Funny thing is the measures in the document are CHEAPER than handing out cheques, sets up business that turn into co-ops, and in turn creates a powerful industry in rural Canada. But since it's not the Liberal way of writing a cheque and hoping the problem goes away, it's BS. The gov't is involved in the oil industry heavily, but in a way that encourages development, involved in fisheries, involved in the lumber industry. Do you hate it when the gov't tries to help industry and solves problems and gets results? That's where the gov't should stick it's nose, not in our culture, morals, traditions that is where society should take care of itself.

I totally agree on a good agricultural policy. What do you think that might be? The one on the NFU Website Plus the same protection that Monsanto gets with the Plant Breeders act (Royalties!!!)

I suppose you'll have to see what Liberals are like under Dion and make an assessment. At the moment, you know where you stand on Harper. Not happy with his decision on the wheat board, other than that he's doing a pretty good job. It's funny, the Liberals have a legitimate shot at a majority, but they keep pissing rural Canada off. I'm pretty sure Dion will get a minority, and if he has a brain in his head he'll end that Trudeau esque arrogance of the Liberal party. If in government he has a real ag policy other than saving the wheat board and handing out cheques that truly helps us out, he'll get votes out west, it's like they hate rural Canada or something. I hope that Dion does a good job, but I'm not getting my hopes up. He's gonna have to earn the Western vote.

So the Conservatives are forced to get rid of the wheat board. In other words, they have no choice but to do it. Again, you get what you vote for. My riding voted Liberal in 93 to punish the tories over the GST, what did we get out of it, an abysmal ag policy and an ag crisis, so your right we get what we vote for.

And if the Liberal party didn't treat us like second class citizens we'd be able to vote for them and we wouldn't be in this mess. Well, blame the Liberals for the Conservatives killing the wheat board. That's of course fine - you'll be out of the business all together in a few years. Maybe you'll be treated better when you don't farm anymore. I blame the Liberals for dismantling crow, implementing the plant breeders act, the screw the west we'll take the rest attitude, policy that completely slaps us in the face (gun control), throwing little bits of money at a problem and calling that an ag strategy. No the Liberal party and their do nothing attitude enabled this calamity to happen, had they been a take action party like the CPC (although their action is wrong, but they are trying to solve a problem) there wouldn't be this mess.

The Liberal party hasn't made it a policy to end marketing boards without consulting farmers first. Rural supporters of the Tories might be very angry at the Liberals for a host of ills but the Wheat Board is a strike at the heart. So was the Crow Rate...

Getting rid of the wheat board will benefit the big players in the industry at the expense of the small guys. As usual, the conservatives support the big players, not the small guys. Killing the wheat board won't affect the conservatives because the small guys will vote for them anyway (that's rural western Canada we are talking about). So the big players will be happy, the conservatives will be happy, and the farmers should be happy (because they'll get what they vote for). Pretty simple. And if the Liberal party didn't treat us like second class citizens we'd be able to vote for them and we wouldn't be in this mess.

In fact there is a direct correlation between driving and education. This is why insurance companies give discounts to students who have above 80% average. These students are less likely to get into an accident (for whatever reason - presumably they are more responsible and less likely to do stupid things with their vehicles) and present a lower risk to the insurance companies. A 17-year-old with good marks will be paying less for insurance than a 17-year-old dropout. Link plz. I call BS. There are lots of skids that do have their grade 12 as well, so by taking an opportunity to better themselves with a license, you'd take that one opportunity away from them. And you wonder why I hate the Liberal party, god forbid if you don't fall into their vision. Here's a thought at the high dropout rates, the kids parents aren't there to give their kids the swift kick in the ass needed to go through school. Go after them. Why should the government take over the job as parents? There are some that have no choice but to drop out, don't punish them.

It's not off-topic, we are talking about the dangers of driving, specifically the dangers of a 16 year old driving. It's no more insane to prevent a 16 year old from driving than it is to prevent a 16 year old from drinking. Yet, previous governments didn't lower the drinking age to 16, so does that mean that every premier in recent history (don't know what the drinking laws were like way back when) was "playing father" by preventing 16 year olds from drinking, as mentioned in the opening post: "Premier Dalton McGuinty wants to play everyones father..." If dropping out of school had a direct correlation to making your skills as a driver diminish then for the good of not harming anyone take their license away, but this is not the case. McGuinty is saying since your going to dropout of school you can't drive, that's crap. They have restrictions on 16 year olds with booze and driving due to public and personal safety. Dropping out of school does nothing.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home Could it be that Muslims are not as intolerant as some people like to believe? the thing that troubles me is that people think all muslims are intolerant, I wouldn't say that, I'd say the people that live in the middle east are intolerant if we're generalizing here.

If you're comparing the dangers of driving vs. drinking, it doesn't make any sense to talk about drinking AND driving. I could just as easily ask you, how many people are hit and killed by a 16 year old driving drunk or a 16 year old just plain drinking? What does make sense is to ask, how many people are killed by a 16 year old ONLY drinking vs. killed by a 16 year old ONLY driving. It makes sense that's part of the dangers of drinking. Car accidents happen to all age groups, thats like asking how many people are killed by a 34 year old driving and a 34 year old drinking. This is off topic, it's not the government to take license away just for dropping out of school, that's insane.

Hmmm. How many people are hit and killed by a 16 year old drinking, how many are hit and killed by a 16 year old driving? how many people are hit and killed by a 16 year old driving drunk or a 16 year old just plain driving?

Does it cause harm for a 16 year old to drink? Does it cause harm for a 16 year old to drive? Why the difference? Hmm. How many 16 year olds get sick from drinking, how many get sick from driving?

There is no oil-patch in Ontario. Mr. 17-year-old should stay in school until he is 18 and then he can go drive a truck. A high-school diploma will provide him with more opportunities later on and it will pay off so he can sit on his butt and study for another year. Besides nobody will hire Mr. 17-year-old to drive a truck because Mr. 17-year-old's insurance will cost them 3 times as much as someone else's. Some people can't do the school thing, why should they be chained to school, contrary to popular belief it's not for everyone. It might take him a few more years to get it, why should he rot when he can contribute to the economy and make a life for himself. Haven't you heard of the labor shortage in Alberta, they won't be caring too much if he's 17 if there are people who go through special education that drive truck too.

But the voter is stupid. Judging from Flaherty's record in Ontario and Harper's record so far, they will also: -provide income-splitting on some type of income (like dividends or capital gains) and advertise it as income-splitting across the board that "all hard-working Canadians will benefit from", -give more beer and popcorn money to "deserving parents" as a way to "invest in Canada's future" -send some Ralph bucks to everyone (in some form or another) because "the people are much smarter than government and know better what to do with the money", -come up with 100 new tax credits for this and that because "Canadians should be rewarded" for everything from dieting and exercising to keeping their lawns weed-free -cut corporate taxes because "the Canadian people will benefit", -pour billions and billions into Quebec because "Quebeckers deserve it" (in Quebec) and "it will strengthen the Canadian economy" (elsewhere), -pour more billions into subsidies for farmers, plumbers, asbestos producers, and everyone else who can vote "to strengthen the Canadian economy" -earmark lots of money for studying how to improve health-care because "Canadians deserve world class health-care" and advertise it as a once and for all solution to all the problems ailing the health-care system -earmark money to change 1 line in the Clean Air Act and call it the Pristine Air Act at some point in the future -spend more to build more jails (or rent them) and call it the Act for Crime-free Canada -waste more money on national security projects because "Canadians' security is a number one priority" (along with 100 others) -give money to some seniors because they obviously deserve it (they vote a lot) and advertise it as some universal program that will solve all problems of the elderly -cut the immigration application fee for some type of immigrants and again claim that it applies to everyone The result of all these wonderful initiatives will be: -lots of votes for the CPC -a massive hidden deficit that everyone will know about but will not show up on the books until after the following election (when they will be kicked out of government) -lots of angry voters when they realize that not everyone qualifies for everything Easy comrade, I'm sorry me and the majority of Canadians like to feel safe, keep our money which we work for, and don't mind that corporations contribute to infrastructure. Cuba is warm this time of year.

It is the "DeBeers" name that sticks in your memory. That is the only thing that has changed -- not the demand for diamonds. 1) being a near-monopoly means nothing Furthermore, a near-monopoly can still have its profits cut be a small competitor. DeBeers will always strive for you to select a DeBeers diamond over any other. 2) if "marketing a diamond as something particular in fact boosts their numbers" as you say, why not market pebbles instead?? Why not market pebbles as the symbol of love?? The demand for pebbles will rise. Everybody will want a DeBeers pebble! Well basically a diamond is a pebble (it's only practical use is in cutting and grinding due to its hardness) The only reason why they are worth a stupendous amount is due to the high demand which results in it being made the symbol of love. De Beers said Diamonds (pebble) are the symbol of love, and people went nuts over it -> demand created. If Spinel was marketed like Diamonds back in the day, i can assure you that they would be worth a fortune and diamonds only used in industrial applications.

Not all but a lot more of them end up poor and unemployed. Also, not all people in jail are criminals. Not all drunk minors cause harm either. In addition, current dropouts are going to do worse than dropouts have in the past as the average level of education is going up and up pretty quickly and the number of jobs dropouts can do is going down and down. Taking away a welfare recipient's driver's license is not an incentive to find work. For a 17-year-old though it is an incentive to go back to school, so that s/he doesn't end up being a welfare recipient later. People in jail are criminals they have been tried and sentanced, they are criminals. Drunk minors cause a lot more harm than a dropout. So Mr. 17-year-old dropout who wants to drive a tandem axle truck out on the oil patch or gets his class 1 to drive truck as that's what he's best qualified to do and can make somewhat of a wage. He can't now because Ontario politicians took this opportunity away from him. People are going to drop out anyway, you shouldn't take that opportunity away from him to get ahead (even if it is just driving truck) taking away a welfare recipients drivers licenese is just as much incentive to find work as it is for a dropout to go back to school.

Wow, as a farmer, we like the wheatboard, of course the Albertan ones don't care, those guys are getting almost 12 grand a quarter from oil companies just for owning land where oil happens to be. My interest is in getting a fair price, the CWB will get that, by dividing us we are gonna have to be forced to take the price given to us by companies which will get smaller and smaller. You bitch about marxism, I bitch about the impending feudalism that would come in.

Total War Series, instant classic

I think De Beers produces much of the worlds diamonds, it's a near monopoly for practical purposes. Marketing a diamond as something particular in fact boosts their numbers, even if the slim few percent go to other companies. Hey that's what the course said, something like that sticks in the memory, I think it's marketing genius. How many other gems are out there? A ruby could have been the symbol of love for pete sake, no De Beers got their shit together and look at what we got now.

Again, it does. When they end up poor and unemployed, our taxes will be paying their welfare instead of going into health-care for example where this money can save lives. Dropouts take away resources that can be put to much better use. Not all dropouts end up poor and unemployed. That's like saying we should take away welfare recipient's driver's liscences as an incentive to find employment. i know some that have done all right for themselves and for what they do they need their driver's liscence, should they be punished because they've made it without school?

This has happened in South Dakota before as well. A former Republican Senator was out from 1969 to 1973. There has been talk though that this Democratic Senator might be forced out. The American system is based on electing a candidate as a person more so than in Canada, the guys down there elected Senator Johnson, he might be a vegetable, but he's an elected one that's what the people wanted, any attempt to remove him would be undemocratic, he's not dead.

Agreed. People are too lazy to vote but they always have time to complain, complain, complain. I support mandatory voting. Even if it doesn't force people to think when they vote, it will at least force politicians to cater to all segments of the population (not just to the elderly or social conservatives because they are more likely to vote than others). Agreed too, they make us fill out the damn census they can make us vote, mail out all the election platforms, make a decision based on the platform mail a ballot with the platforms and be done with it. I don't care if I have to wait a month for election results.