White Doors

It already is available for Canadian use. Irvings in NB buy their crude from Venezuela. You would have to convince them to buy it from Alberta instead. Why would they do that and why are you interested in making them? To what benefit? Also, as per our constitution, natural resources are the domain of the provinces - are you going to amend the constitution because you are angry about paying for gasoline? Who is the idiot now? I think the only greed we are talking about here is yours. You are seemingly the only one wanting something for nothing. That is greedy. Where are the discounted Ontario cars for sale in NB? Your views are myopic and your arguments are not well researched. Your name calling is quite descriptive however. You show me subsidized 'Canadian' cars and maybe then you wouldn't be a hypocrite. As it is you are seemingly only envious and angry. And greedy. I find it odd that you cloak yourself in the flag and then seem to gleefily look forward to the demise of a significant part of the Canadian economy. Where is your loyalty? Also, you should do some research about the oil sands process in Alberta. The refineries make a finished product and export. Someone else could say that the CAW simply screws in a few bolts from parts manufactured somewhere else. How is that a value-add? With the shuttering of the unionized plants in Ontario, apparently it is not much of a value-add in the eyes of some. How are the non-union plants doing? Maybe your anger is directed at the wrong target? The basis of your argument is not a rational one. Thankfully we have people in charge that make decisions very differently than you do. So you call him greedy and then accuse him of wanting to give money to the poor? Your insults are as inconsistent as your 'argument' and 'logic'.

Hmm... So what about the preamble of the US Constitution would you like to change?

When you rail against the name calling that goes towards the 'right' as well we will take your 'suggestion' into advisement, but not until then.

danke, guess we should have the exact date if we are going to bet on it.

No, I said it was 2.9 billion in the first 4 months of the federal fiscal year. I will bet you that we are closer to a 10 billion dollar surplus than we are to a deficit for this fiscal year however. We can have a signature bet if you like. The end of the federal fiscal year is April.

But you are implying a fallacy that the 'poor' people 15 years ago are the same 'poor' people today and the same for the 'rich'. I think this is a logical fallacy. Some people get along fine being 'poor' and don't care to move up. What we should be measuring is how difficult it is for people to 'better' their financials should they have a desire to do so. Government should facilitate this not penalize people with higher taxes once they put that hard work in to become financially independant. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet were not born with Silver Spoons and I suspsect that is more often the norm than 'silver spoons' which the left love to rail about which really just equates to good old fashioned envy. Our economic system should not be based on envy.

I merely recorded the facts and what I reported was that the federal government had a 2.9 Billion dollar surplus for the first 4 months of this fiscal year. It's pretty simple, even you can get it.

You do know there is a different meaning to a Republican form of government and the Republican party.. right?

Cry me a river. I see you over at Babble. Maybe it's not the instults, but the dissenting views that are not tolerated over there that is the real reason you are taking your ball and going home.

You may be getting one soon for the Oilsands

Whoop!

With how the financial's are not performing right now, putting in the second cut to GST early looks like divine provenance in retrospect from where I am sitting.

But they haven't. We are not in deficit. We should post a small surplus for this year, ending in April. So far we have a surplus. Taxes have been cut quite a bit. That is a good thing, espially in light of what is happening now. Ask a home builder how much they like the GST cut. Also, what about the poor people who pay no income tax? They don't want an income tax, they want their money to go further. They not count anymore?

So you don't think it's important to protect the leader of our country? Would your opinion change if they were spending that 30 million on Jack Layton if he were PM? I think it would... Fess up!

So what? They save a buck and then I save a buck. Neat how that works eh? I don't need anyone to 'look after me'. I look after myself - I know, a very novel thought in Canada. Someone has to leave the teet unmolested so people like you lined up for a suckle can have a turn.

Gingrich? not a chance. Romney

It doesn't surprise me in the least that he is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Not sense in bothering with him then. His mind is made up and no amount of facts will change it.

A list of our war crimes eh? And you emigrated here from Russia? LOL

oh boys, young and old are static 'groups'? well duh, who cares? People (unless they have discovered the fountain of youth) move through these groups, much the same way people move from poor to wealthy. I know I was poor. I'm not 'trying' to do anything, I simply said that alot of people who were 'poor' when they were young are not 'poor' as they get older. Is that so hard to understand?

I will never be in the food line, but thanks. No, it is BUNK because he obviously has an AGENDA (look it up) to promote UNIONIZED workers over people who are not UNIONIZED. He could give a crap about the Canadian economy, he is only concerned about his union membership and the dues that come from that.

I did not say what I thought the Geneva Conventions say. You and others have said that Omar should get a free pass because he was 15 at the time he killed the US Medic. Then you and others cite the Geneva Conventions for protections on Child Soldiers... Well, the convention itself, even if he was a part of a legitimate armed forces, doesn't say that they are not criminally responsible - it merely provides recommendations on how to handle them. Also, since Omar was 'fighting' and was flouting the rules of war, then even any of these recommendations would not apply to his case. He is being handled as a child who commits a crime under the US armed forces law. There is NOTHING in the Geneva conventions that prohibits this. If you have information to the contrary, please feel free to 'correct' me - otherwise suck it up and move on.

Q'uelle Suprise! Stanford is a UNION honcho! lol This 'study' is BUNK.

EXACTLY Even they way they word it, it is clear that they are trying to imply that the 'rich' and the 'poor' are a static group of people. What they should be looking in to, and I have yet to see a study that does this, is how 'easy' it is for people to be upwardly mobile. ie: If you put the effort in, get the education and training that you need, how long does it take you to move up through the classes? THAT is the key question that should be studied. Right now what they are really studying is how much more people who are in the peak of their careers earn compared to someone that is just starting out. big deal. There should be a large difference.

No, no he is not.