Saturn

Good, we make both. Since you are in accounting, I'm going to say that you choose to be ignorant of the numbers and that our "second rate" automotive industry is nearly half the size of Alberta's entire economy and twice the size of your oil and gas industry. It's nice to see you making some contribution to the country after 130+ years but our socialist paradise is just fine without your dollars, thank you. We'd be even better without your attitude. You may want to trim it down to what you are actually worth because we know whose door you'll come knocking on when uncle Bush gets turfed out of office or some Saudi prince smiles and your newfound wealth evaporates.

Harper's attack on Bain in QP this week is one of if not the most despicable and disgusting act I've seen a Canadian politician perform. Not only does he condone what borders criminal behaviour on behalf of the RCMP - pulling political strings and arguing for secret hearings to then leak "secret" information from these hearings for political gain and to destroy lives and reputations M.Arar style - but he also dares spin a preventative measure born of the paranoia of 9/11 into a solution for a 22 year old case that the Tories ignored for 8 years under their watch and the RCMP failed to take advantage of for another 3 years that that sunset clause was in effect. Finally, his explanation for stacking the bench with conservative cronies is an attack on a relative of a backbench MP, taking advantage of RCMP leaks on "secret" hearings that he supports reading about in the newpapers and reading in the House. It is disgusting that instead of taking his responsibility to keep the RCMP from meddling in politics seriously, he encourages them and takes advantage of the RCMP abusing its powers. Harper has further shown that he is not only a lowly dictator but a weak and stupid one at that - allowing certain government agencies to take him for a ride for their own gains and against the interests of the public. If he imagines that he is scoring points with the voting public for condoning and encouraging/using such lowlife tactics, he is badly mistaken. Now I'm going to puke.

Go read you bible, westerner. I'm yet to see anything useful come out of BC, financial or otherwise. Except for more religious fanatics from the bible belt. You've got to be joking. Nice thinking in theory but in reality there are plenty of political and geographical/transportation issues which will keep the americans buying canadian oil even at higher prices. Taxation of imported oil will reduce the amount of money leaving the country to buy oil (except you'll now proceed to argue further the raising the price of oil will give consumers incentives to buy more).

a problem? It's a problem because we have to compete with these countries and falling behind them will put us on the losing end of the competition. Neither do I, but the mikedavids of Canada are out there trying to make it harder for immigrants to adapt and function in our society. Secondly, importing more immigrants doesn't fix the problem of underachieving youth who will remain a drag on society for life. It's better to educate one aboriginal youth than to import one immigrant and leave that youth on welfare for life.

Good. It's nice to sentence people for Holocaust denial. In the meantime we call the Armenian genocide a "tragedy" and our good NATO friend Turkey puts people in jail for even mentioning the genocide it committed against the Armenians.

LOL! Give me a break! Right-wingers are the ones who always think they know best and who are always so opinionated especially on issues that they know nothing about. They are the big grown-ups who know best how to take care of themselves, yet they are the first to cry foul and cry the loudest all the way to Ottawa when their industry is in trouble and government "has" to bail them out. They are so mature and responsible, they can't even raise their kids without thousands of dollars in government handouts. They are so capable that when a more capable immigrant gets a well-paying job they cry foul about discrimination and other bullshit instead of looking at their own shortcomings. They know best but always someone else is responsible for all their problems. Until they start acting like they are actually capable of handling their own matters and stop whining for everything like little kids, nobody will take them seriously.

I am not pleased with the policies of any party (and very displeased with Harper). Since the CPC will keep him around for the coming election in his position of sole master of their policy, for me it will come down to what other parties and candidates in my riding have to offer in their election platforms. Slavik and Canadian Blue, congrats on having decided to vote for nothing. geoffrey, with the threat of that second NEP you are referring to, you ought to just lie down and die. If it were possible, I'd prefer to vote for the BQ and Reform II.

Much of the systemic problems arise from chronic underfunding, thanks to the Tories who brought Canada to the edge of bankruptcy. Consistent increases in spending and decreases in revenues resulting in piling up debt (the Tory way) is neither possible nor plausible in perpetuity. That Mr. Harper has had the ability to send billions to parents, seniors, the military, etc. and spend another $10 billion in the last 2 months, is entirely due to Liberal incompetence - leaving him with a massive surplus to blow in no time and with a substantially lower debt. Had he inherited his predecessor or Harris, whose buddies are now running Harper's top departments, he would have been buried in deficits and debt.

I don't know how conservative a judge Harper has to appoint to determine that locking people up without telling them why or charging them with anything does not violate the Charter.

Diesel and oil is not where cars should be going. Hybrids are an excellent way to provide power and minimize waste by converting a good part of it into electricity. With high gas prices and environmental concerns, it's no wonder that Japanese and European car manufacturers are making a killing, while the NA gas-guzzling producers are down in the gutter. Subsidizing the high cost of hybrids can only encourage manufacturers to produce more efficient vehicles and to further improve efficient technologies. In 5-10 years they'll come down in price and will provide substantially cleaner and cheaper modes of transportation than current full gasoline/diesel engines.

I don't know how you manage to spin it this way, but this rambling is beyond ridiculous. 1) Canada uses very little of your oil, so stop pretending that ROC depends on your oil. 2) The US gets most of your oil and give it a few years, they'll start taxing it more - not our fault. 3) They'll keep using your oil even at a higher price - I don't see them going to Hugo for oil or getting it from Iraq. 4) Nobody is talking about taxing oil at production - but at the consumption level. This means that we'll be taxing Norway's oil and that one barrel of yours that you use/waste to take 3 barrels to market. It might just give you a nudge to waste half a barrel instead of a full barrel. It will also give us a nudge to use/waste less of Norway's oil. 5) Now keep the hysteric doomsday scenarios down to a minimum. Trimming down waste won't cause the end of the world. We may just end up breathing easier.

You guys in Quebec are so concerned about CO2 emissions maybe you should separate and pay your own way in life. Then you can talk about spending your own money on destroying your own economy, instead of spending the money of Canadians whose jobs provide the subsidies that keep you out of bankruptcy court. Pollution is harmful and like other destructive activities, such as theft and smoking where people underestimate the harm done and are thus unwilling to stop engaging in, there have to be financial or other penalties to curb said behaviour. Separating doesn't work because you can't separate the atmosphere and the environment, so you can nix this nonsense. Pollution isn't free (of no consequence) and if your activities produce pollution, then you should do whatever is possible to minimize it. When you aren't reasonable enough to do it voluntarily, you need financial incentives or disincentives to do it. It's that simple and the free ride is over.

Argus, since you apparently know a lot that I don't, could you discuss in some detail what in particular is ailing the immigration system and how it can be fixed? And where this "racism" factor comes in? Thx.

I'm in favour of any daycare that allows people to go about their lives and do their work without worrying about their kids. Kids are supposed to be a good thing, not a burden that puts you out of work (or an excuse for not working). For one, it is wasteful because one daycare worker takes care of 6-8 kids, one stay-at-home parent of only 1 or 2. Is it not wasteful to have 4 doctors see as many patients as one doctor would typically see? Second, not every parent is a early childhood education grad - parents are doctors, engineers, hair dressers and bus drivers. Putting them out of work to do something outside of their area of specialization is an enormous waste. People choose the wrong things all the time. Childcare at home is not any better than good quality daycare for kids (in fact there are indications that it's worse). Childcare at home is only beneficial for paranoid, overprotective parents, who would be better off learning to deal with their irrational fears because the kids are not going to sit home with them for life. It is also better for a young person to work and to acquire and develop the skills necessary to earn more later than to sit home, waste the opportunity to earn an income in the meantime and to develop their skills, and then enter the labour market at 35+ with no skills or badly outdated skills. Giving people money to do that is a disfavour and a bad one at that. I agree. Give me $50K/yr on the condition that I quit my job and I'll find a good way to spend it. The UCCB has nothing to do with childcare. It's simply a vote-buying scheme. Lower income families with children get much more significant support from the CTB and that could have been augmented targeting the people who need it at a much lower cost, instead of handing out money to everyone with kids who can vote.

This poll should include "All of the above". I equally resent at least half of those policies.

The difference between those conflicts and the current one is that the decision to go there was made by politicians, while the current one is very much driven by the military behind the scenes. It is Hillier's job to ensure that the military performs its duties well, not to decide what those duties should be.

It is true that the Liberal governments previous didn't support the military with any enthusiasm. Martin began the process for rebuilding and should be credited. Hillier has to be careful though. If the military openly sides with the Tories politically as the military did with Republicans in the U.S., it eventually leads to a disconnect with the public. As long as he remains an advocate of the military, he will be okay. If he endorses the Tories next election even in a vague way, he will have crossed the line. Hillier has far overstepped his duties and for a long time too. But this has gone unnoticed by most until now. His resignation is long overdue.

The Liberals "favour" terrorists to gain votes from the ethnic minorities in Liberal ridings and Martin supported pedophilia to gain the votes of pedophiles in certain Liberal ridings. Conservatives ought to have their heads checked.

Steve is losing it. Hopefully, he'll crack under pressure and the Asian invasion, gays are evil and women are scum will come out before the next election.

Abandoning your children is a good life style choice that is good for the economy? Abandoning your children blah blah. Your children need you less than you think. They need to socialize and play with their peers, not sit locked up at home staring at your face 24hrs a day. Exactly. Taking tax dollars from productive people and giving it to other less productive people to stay home and be even less productive is waste all around. You assume that all labour is equal - that is not true. A skilled engineer or doctor working a few hours a week is going to produce more wealth for the economy than someone working 40 hours flipping burgers at MacDonalds. That is why is wrong to assume that having one spouse stay at home is bad for the economy. Not all labour is equal. However, engineers tend to marry engineers and doctors tend to marry doctors. A doctor marrying a high-school dropout is quite unusual. The wide majority of stay-at-home parents (who have a working spouse) can earn more than the cost of daycare - even a $10/hr job pays over $20K/yr, which far exceeds the daycare costs for 2 or even 3 children. However many of them feel that earning $10K or $20K or even $30K in excess of daycare costs is just not worth their time and effort. The system is already very generous to such parents and they get plenty of benefits for choosing not to work. Of course those benefits play an important role in their decision not to work because the system pays them for not working. The last thing the economy needs is more taxes to subsidize more workers quitting their jobs to stay home.

Nice selective quoting but this article doesn't in any way imply that daycare is bad for kids and that parents should get cash from the government to sit home with their kids. It simply confirms previous research on the topic by pointing out that: 1) Infants are better off staying with their parents for the first year - employers (and governments) should offer longer parental leave to new parents, not force them to quit altogether and give them handouts, 2) The quality of daycare is the number one factor in the outcome for children - Quebeckers haven't done themselves a favour by rushing to create a program that makes extensive use of private basement daycares, which the researchers correctly evaluate as "mediocre", 3) Even in "mediocre" quality daycare, "the stimulation [preschoolers and toddlers] get at day care tends to make them better prepared for school than children who are home with a parent full time." The article concludes: Clearly, the author is arguing in favour of better access to good quality childcare for preschoolers and toddlers and for more parental leave for new parents, not in throwing parents out of the workforce and then giving them in $100/month in a pathetic effort to make up for it.

Tell women that their options are 1) to give up their lives and careers in favour of being babysitters and maids OR 2) have no children, and wait for birthrates to go up. I see a lot of women around me choose to have no children or have just 1 child because because they don't feel that they have reasonable daycare options. Since daycare has become such a politicized issue and there is no movement on this front, I guess we'll be forced to go the increased immigration route.

The plan is to give employers money to open daycare spaces for their workers. So far it has produced 0 daycare spaces. Ironically, this plan copied another program that Mike Harris ran in Ontario for 6-7 years which produced 0 daycare spaces. Clearly, the Conservatives were aiming very high on this one.

And since Harper will want to be defeated on the budget, I would not be surprised to see income-splitting in it at all. It will certainly get him a lot of votes and he doesn't have to implement it.

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/184016