Jerry J. Fortin

Or if you are born in Bagdad its death to the infidel!

Safe is a relative condition. Making society safe could mean an environmental approach to some people. Consider the relative safety of living next to a chemical plant, or a weapons test range. To what extent is society responsible for safety and in what manner?

Unfortunately adult choice doesn't come into play to a large degree with respect to religious beliefs, it tends to be a matter of heritage and upbringing that factor into the equation for the most part.

Care to cite any factual backup for your claim? Sure, try Revenue Canada and look it up for yourself. There are tons of deductions available, but you need the income to do it. So in theory its a fair system because everybody has the opportunity to make these deductions, wrong! A guy making minimum wage can't take advantage of tax shelters because he simply doesn't have the disposable income to do it. It isn't rocket science. Aside from that look at small business owners. I knew a few of them and while I may make more money as a wage slave they keep more because of the tax savings they enjoy. Taxation isn't black and white people, it is a big grey area by design. How about the case of a single income traditional family with a stay at home mom and a working dad. Compare them to a two income family that makes the same amount of total family income, guess who pays more in tax? The single income family! Go figure! Look at the case of a tar sands company in Alberta who made billions of dollars last year but paid less than 10 million in taxes. Strange but true, tax shelters do a lot of good if you can use them. To use them you need the income! The greater the income the greater the tax advantage is a good rule of thumb.

The justice system ought not to be equated with sport. Life isn't a ballgame folks. Each case should be considered seperately and judged accordingly. The presumption of innocence is lost with this kind of legislation. In essense an individual can be found guilty of being guilty, which is a tadd redundant in nature in my opinion. This kind of crap legislation does not seek to resolve the issues in question and does not even address the cause of the problem in the first place. The problem is caused because we let criminals go free in the first place. Violent offenders should receive a duration of natural life sentence, unless we intend to allow them the option of reoffending. Society is responsible when a felon is released to cause harm to an individual within that society. In other words we have created the problem in the first place and the solution proposed is designed to allow a continuation of the problem. Hardly a viable solution if you are the intended or innocent victim of the offending individual. Society needs to get a grip. Death sentences are a cruel punishment by definition so that is not an option. Incarceration is the agreed and accepted punishment for criminal offences by society, and society is being denied justice through the parole system. Non violent offences are another matter, as are victimless crimes.

The CWB only hurts western farmers. It does not apply to anything east of Manitoba, its an example of the federal practice of discrimination against provinces. By getting rid of the wheat board the Tories will open the door to a nice big American company to come in and take over the monopoly. The entire mess was designed to screw western Canadians to death one way or another.

Some of these stats being thrown around are hillarious! I love the top 30% theory. Lets view things in at least a realistic manner shall we. Taxation does not truely apply to higher incomes. This is factual in terms of both business and individual income taxes. The higher the income the greater the advantage of shelters and deductions. It gets to a point where huge incomes pay practically no taxes and that is a simple truth. The public is taxed heavily to provide funding for government. That is the reality. Without taxation government would cease to exist. So don't expect taxes to go away, because they won't. The best that citizens could hope for is fair taxation, and that is asking a hell of a lot.

I would vote Socred before I vote PC. There is no independent candidate or wanna be candidate in my corner of the province, so I will likely have to make an anti-government protest vote. It will probably be an NDP vote, but it may become a Green vote. Anybody but the PC please..........

I don't have a candidate to support because I am not now, nor will I ever be involved with the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta. In fact I couldn't care less who that partisan faction elected to lead their party. That party has had its day period. Its time for a change. I am still a little ticked off that the government has squandered every budget surplus in every year without any form of debate in the Alberta Legislature. We are talking about literally billions of tax dollars being spent without anybody but the government being able to get a word in edgewise about it. That action is decidedly counter productive to the democratic process. It indicates the true lines of thinking that the government utilizes on a daily basis. This practice reveals much about how this party and this government operate, and that is without any public oversight. The Klein government did not decide to tackle the public debt on its own. The entire concept was part of the provincial Liberal platform during a general election and yet the Tories lay claim to both the concept and the final achievement. The Heritage Trust Fund was originally designed by the Social Credit Party of Alberta, yet the Tories lay claim to that as well. That partisan faction has made many claims to fame, but that does not make those claims true. Alberta needs political leadership with a vision for public benefit. The Tories have a vision of corporate benefit and that does not advance the causes of the public by any stretch of the imagination.

I must disagree for the reasons I have already stated. This legislation is useful to this government and those who supported them during an electoral process last spring. Having said that I personally would not support this legislative with a phone call or email to my elected representative, but I will not correspond my opposition to it either.

Nope, I meant to say that the tax payers servants that are employed in the Alberta Legislature should have used the Alberta Heritage Trust Fund to buy PetroCan when it was for sale in the first place, and then should have used that company to exploit the tar sands and build a few refineries to partake in a value added production process that would have proven to be a far better use of the Trust Fund than having is disappear into general revenues. The question of whether or not governments should be in business is a broken record. In this province, of Alberta, we have seen the deregulation of natural gas and electric companies as well as telecommunications companies, that have resulted in higher costs for the same products and services to citizens. You only have to check your utility bills to confirm this and know that citizens got a raw deal. In some cases the government can do it cheaper and better than anybody else.

Harper is wasting his time preaching to the converted. On the other hand part of his campaign was to address this very issue. Seems to be a case of damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. I am not a Harper fan or even a supporter, but the man does seem intent on following up on his promises. Not too common in the big picture of Canadian politics. Is this legislative effort a waste of time? In my opinion it is not for the simple reason that he was elected and formed a government with this as an objective. Given that he has the numerical superiority to form a government it is his responsibility to ensure that his government actually follows through on what promises he made during his election.

Hundreds of years of discrimination by both of the official founding language speakers gave us the results we have today. Why do people think we embraced multiculturalism in the first place if it wasn't to appease the minority French speaking portion of our citizenry? The latest craze of disriminatory actions are against the Muslims, prior to the second world war it was against Jews. Before that it was the natives, we have a long track record of disrimination in this country. I might add that we rarely get it right in our choice of slutions to this ever present problem. The majority dominates the minority, always. This is not unique to Canada you understand but is equally applied everywhere in the world. The present system of Human Rights laws in Canada go a long ways to prevent a lot of garbage but still can't actually deal with the problems of human nature. What ever it is that is different between a minority and a majority create problems for a society. Legislation will not stop discrimination, it is a mere means of punishing it. Innocent until proven guilty is the only name of the game. It is folly to believe otherwise. It is not groups that are guilty but the individuals within those groups that are responsible. We need to rethink the basis of society in order to defeat this problem. There are painful but plausable solutions that can be drafted for legislation, it is only our imaginations that prevent the solution from coming to light. Once again this is another subject that requires out of the box type of thinking.

Why in the world would we want to Supreme Court of Canada to decide the outcome of legislative efforts? I am not comfortable with the fact that these people are SELECTED by the government instead of ELECTED by the people who are supposed to be masters of the government. I favour an overhaul of government myself, in a way that would make them more accountable to the public. Whenever I get the chance I always site the attributes of direct democracy.

If the Alberta government had even half a functional brain they would have built half a dozen refineries to process Alberta oil. Irving has the right idea.

Rue and Higgly are darned good at this debate stuff I think. Both have made valid points and gone after very well. But I have to ask why either of you choose to pick a side in the first place? Why not simply advocate that the opposing sides undertake a form of binding arbitration with a complete "shunning" as a penalty for non-compliance. Let those who fail to make peace suffer the consequences of their actions. It is time for the worlds citizens to enter into this equation and hold thier leaders accontable. It is time to start weeding out the leaders who would seek to dominate instead of cooperate. The same fate awaits us all, we live and then we die. We are all equal in death, but in life we are not. It should be the intention of our leaders to make us as equal in life as we are in death.

Virtually all religions lay claim to be peace loving and caring. There are of course perverted zealots who attempt to take out of context specific phrasologies to utilize to their twisted benefit. For the most part it is safe to say the religions flourish in times of hardship, because people need something to believe in that is more powerful than themselves. Now is one of those times for Muslims who view progress as something in opposition to their beliefs. The problem lies with the concept that traditional thinking is more beneficial to the individual than progressive thinking. Hence the thought that some countries are backward and some are not.

The only solution is through the justice system. Granted that that system is completely fouled up, this problem as well as many other indicate that we need to review and redesign the system upon which our society is based upon. The rule of law is the ultimate science, and it is the responsibility of the government to undertake the necessary steps to protect its citizens through the attending bureaucracies that make up the infrastructure of government. The problems of society are reflected in the policies and practices of its government. Without redefining the government with its policies and practices then it is not possible to address the problems as a society.

JBG Enron looked pretty good on the big board and so did Brex didn't they? That is about the sum reality of the market isn't it? The stock market is not a real valuable tool of determining economic health. The US annual budget deficit is a large as many nations GDP, your are borrowing your brains out down there. Which wasn't such a bad thing on the one hand in your capitalistic world in as much as private corporations are floating a hell of a lot of public paper debt. But on the other hand it leaves the government in a large way influenced by corporate concerns. Not exactly a by the people and for the people kinda operation anymore is it? The United States is beginning to see the bubble burst in real estate. How much of your economy is engaged in residential construction and in all the other do dads that go with it like appliances and furniture JBG? With a fall in new home construction don't you think that maybe there will be a detrimental impact on your economy? When real estate prices fall the next step is a drop in new home sales, and then new home construction slows doesn't it? As it stands now foreclosusers a way up, and interest rates are in an upward trend as well aren't they? Doesn't that translate into an increase in foreclosures? With foreclosures on the rise then used home prices fall to absorb the increased entrance of discounted priced homes that banks are unloading to mitigate their losses, then the bottom falls out of the market. It always has before, and it will again. Add to this problem the current war footing that your economy is thriving off of. The next election will be fought on getting out of Iraq, the planned exit strategies of the Republicans verses the Democrats. Either way, once you do get out then defense spending will fall won't it? How much of your economy is tied to the viability of the military industrial complex JBG? With a reduction in defense spending wont there be a rollback of pork barrel political contracts and a corresponding drop in employment in those industries? Reducing employment will further hurt the real estate sector, but it will also has an effect on the financial sector considering the impact on blue chip companies and mutual funds won't it? Keeping in mind the current trend toward flipping the greenback in favour of the Euro for oil in the middle east, there is already pressure on the US dollar that will become very problematic for the US Fed won't it? That in conjunction with a large scale correction in the stock market will impact the greenback and that will have a long term consequences. High standards of living in western economies are about to confront the low standards of living in the far east to an extent never before seen. China is starting to develop an economy driven by modern industrial production that will place it in direct competition with western producers in the same markets and with the same products. Our workforce cost more than ten times theirs, where do you think the jobs will go JBG? This isn't pie in the sky stuff JBG, it is real and current. Cross referance data for yourself and see what I am talking about, there is a distinct possibility that a major crunch is coming. The American government needs to start thinking outside of the box in order to survive what will come over the next few years. How do you think your government will look in international eyes when the wheels fall off JBG. You folks need some friends right damn now, before it hits the fan. Loyalty counts people, but damn the torpedoes when its too late to help.

Things are indeed beginning to slow down in conventuional oil production. At present Alberta gains more from natyural gas than conventional oil in royalties. New conventional oil finds are becoming rather scare in Alberta, as is new finds of gas. On the other hand, there is massive development ongoing in tar sands development with projects planned up to 2015. Conventional oil production is dropping as rapidly as tar sands is expanding, and the difference is about 16% in terms of royalty revenue losses. We face grave problems ahead.

It is not the Canadian identity that needs to be diluted JBG. America is in desperate need of real friends. Our culture and identity is as assured as any southern Rebel in your own nation. We will always truely be a distinct society. What is needed at this point in time is a means of altering the world perception of America, the reputation of your nation is being tarnished. Canada can provide cover for your nation. America now finds itself between a rock and a hard place. The US economy is in taters and the strain on the government budget is becoming problematic. The military industrial complex is eating you alive and you simply can't or won't see it for what it is. You are starting to eat your own economic young through the devolution of your once so proud capitalistic democracy. Corporate governance has taken root through the arms and defense industries and their attending lobbies. Pork barrel politics is the name of the game at the expense of the needs of the citizens. Strangely enough closer ties to Canada can help the international perception of the United States. America needs to take a few steps back from the bleeding edge of international politics, and focus instead on homeland security and all that goes with it. Unless America accepts a pause it wil find itself involved in Iran and North Korea. Soon enough you will find yourselves trading Taiwan for South Korea with China. Iran is the number one supplier of oil from the middle east to China, and just as the Japanese emargo to Japan in the thirties brought on Pearl Harbour a similiar fate may well become a reality in the case of withdrawing access to strategic resources from China. Now is a very dangerous time for America, it is the time to reconsider your options my friend. Without a pause to reformat a political/economic approach to the "New World Order" America faces extremely difficult choices.

The point is that it is their culture not ours. How far should society go to enforce its ideals. Whose society should rule? What culture should be dominant? In terms of democratic strength we should all be using chop sticks and quoting Mao. I don't choose to tell people how to live in my own country, let alone those in far away places who simply believe in things that I do not.

It'd be nice to have it refined in Alberta, but as a free-trade advocate, I'm less certain it's just to put up barriers. When dealing with resources, the inherent wealth of the province, different thoughts can apply. The question is, are we getting fair value for the bitumen... I'd say yes. So the resource isn't being plundered from abroad. Do we lack refining capacity that would make us much richer, absolutely, and I'd like to see the province set up more incentives for producers to refine at home. I would say no, we are not getting fair value. Bitumen has a far lower price than crude oil doesn't it? The 50% price cut also treads on royalty revenues to a large degree. Couple that with the ludicrous tax regime regarding oil sands investments and you get a 1% royalty on half price oil! Three cheers for the Conservative government of Alberta! Who else could come up with such a great deal. The people of this province will soon begin to discover the depths of the incompetence surrounding the Klein government. At that point the bell will toll for them as it did for the Socreds.

The veil is a religous thing, big deal. Like turbans or what have you, its all the same in as much as it serves as a sign to define differences. There is a difference between men and women, the old and the young and so on. Perhaps this topic should be viewed in the light of cultural freedom............

I have looked into it, rather extensively actually. While I am not a NAFTA fan, nor a WTO fan by any stretch of the imagination those organizations are an attempt to coordinate business activities. I am decidedly anti multinational corporation, yet not anti business. I take a stand against corporate governance and favour direct democracy. Its all about freedom for citizens and anything that enhances that freedom is what interests me. I believe that a superstate created from Canada and the United States would serve that purpose. It would provide a foundation that would create the opportunity to improve the human condition by example.