Saturn

Why can you never be sure? Other than your unfounded disdain for the Conservatives? His record shows it. I'm not "making it sound" deceptive - it is deceptive: Even if his "net debt" goes down the real debt can go up. Reducing his "net debt" doesn't mean anything it's just another advertising tool. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/11/23/...bt.html?ref=rss

Those numbers are low because they are 2001 numbers (for tax year 2000). They should be 20-30% higher today in 2006 dollars. The gap between the university educated and the less educated has grown since then and I just read a study a couple of weeks ago which said that university educated women make roughly 3 times what women without degrees make, which is a very significant difference. For men the difference is less significant. But I can't find the study right now and I got tired of looking. Of course no one will starve without an education but in a situation where education is becoming more and more a must, high-school dropouts are going to do even worse on average in the future than they have in the past.

They will need it for pre-election presents for every interest group you can imagine. So far they've taken on a lot of spending initiatives but many will occur in years from now (like massive military equipment purchases) so the surplus (appears) to be safe for now. I say "appears" because I haven't seen their pre-election budget and given who the minister of finance is, you can never be sure that there is a surplus even if he says so. He is good with creative accounting and creative new concepts like the "net debt", which do nothing aside from misrepresenting reality. Really, I have to see his next budget before I can comment but I have rather low expectations of him keeping us in the black and paying down the debt (which is something I really want to see happening).

Your "research" is "my co-worker said this" and "my girlfriend's second cousin did that". That hardly qualifies as an argument, and hence, you get nothing back. You mean one of those internet "You are a genius!" IQ tests where they will send you a genius certificate for $10? Did you order your genius certificate yet?

Strange of you to say. I find you to be particularly emotional, your proofs are anecdotes, and your numbers don't add up. Geoffrey may be younger than you are but I find him far more mature and he is very consistent in his posts - you sound like someone with multiple personality disorder. I do get lazy and don't provide numbers because they are at your fingertips and I doubt that you are interested in seeing numbers. But here are some and I hope I won't hear from you again: Immigrants are not a sick bunch who are here to abuse our health care system: http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/020919/d020919a.htm Immigrants don't live on our backs: In 2001 in the 25 to 44 age group, 2 years after landing - 76% were in the skilled workers categories, only 5% were refugees - 68% had university degrees (vs 19.5% % of Canadian-born in the same age group) - 80% had worked since landing (39% of the remaining were in school) - 50% were employed at 6 mths after landing, 63% at 2 years after landing (roughly the same as the rest of the Canadian population) http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/89-6...001/t005_en.htm? Overall immigrants are better educated than the Canadian-born population: % with university degree in 25 to 44 age group: Immigrants 30.2%, Canadian-born 19.5%, Canada 21.8%. http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/91-2...-XIE2003000.pdf pg. 107 This rate is not to be confused with the one above which pertains to immigrants 2 years after landing (in 1999). The rate of university educated immigrants has gone up very sharply in the last decade due to changes in selection criteria. As I previously stated, we want the immigrants' children more than the immigrants themselves because their children do significantly better than our own: - the children of immigrants catch-up to Canadian children in school by age 8 if their first language is English or French and by age 11 if their first language is other than E/F, and do better afterwards. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011114/d011114a.htm See the graphs in the middle of the page - the children of immigrants are more likely to want university education - % of 15-yr-olds who want university education: visible minority immigrants (79%), Canadian-born non-visible-minority (57%) http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/11-0...511-008-XIE.pdf pg. 10 - the children of immigrants are more likely to get university education Men in the 25 to 37 age group in 2001 with university degrees: children of immigrants (in 5 regional groups) 22.5% to 49.4%, third + generation Canadian 18.8% Women in the 25 to 37 age group in 2001 with university degrees: children of immigrants (in 5 regional groups) 33.4% to 61.3%, third + generation Canadian 25.7% http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/11F...9MIE2005267.pdf pg. 28 Contrary to popular belief here, education is not worthless: % of people employed 25-44 age group (in 2005): - < grade 9: 51.6% - some secondary school: 69.1% - high-school diploma: 80.2% - post-secondary: 86% The same trend applies to both men and women http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/labor62.htm Average earnings (in 2001 in $): Less than high school graduation certificate 21,230 High school graduation certificate and/or some postsecondary 25,477 Trades certificate or diploma 32,743 College certificate or diploma 32,736 University certificate, diploma or degree 48,648 http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/labor50a.htm

Incompetent in Finance? That's a very unique view. Flaherty is seen by many. including the Toronto Star, as one of the brighter lights of the Cabinet. In Harper's Cabinet, he may be indeed.

I don't know. Prentice would be a choice, but he's the ideal Indian guru so why move him? Will Flaherty stay Finance minister? I'd like to see Bernier in that spot myself, but we'll see. Not that I'm suggesting he'd then move Flaherty to environment. I hope not - he's proven to be a pretty incompetent finance minister. I'm thinking Monte for finance, Flaherty for industry and Bernier for environment. Quebeckers will like Bernier and environment, Harper is very concerned about his image in Quebec. I guess that leaves citizenship for Rona. Of course this is all wishful thinking on my behalf because Harper will probably keep Flaherty in finance. But he might move Monte, Bernier and Rona.

I consider myself a strategist and vote based on who is promising what, my assessment on how likely they are to keep their promises and how likely they are to do things they didn't promise and what these things may be, who is running and has a good chance of getting elected in my riding and winning the election. Typically, it is not a difficult decision because there isn't that much choice, now is there? This time though, things are a bit different. I know I won't vote for Harper - he's clearly all talk and no substance in addition to being a control freak. If the liberals are near majority territory they won't get my vote. But I'd rather give Dion a chance than give Harper a second chance. I guess this time around I'll be a last minute chooser - my vote will depend on the last polls prior to the election.

Yes, that's pretty lucky. He already was in charge of the real thing and ouch! He is still in charge of what Harper calls one of his key priorities though and the feds do have some power/responsibilities in the area of health.

You haven't seen anything yet - the overhaul is coming. Another 1000 tax credits in the next budget should lower taxes overall and make the tax form 100 pages long (ah, the benefits of e-filing).

Actually I didn't expect anyone to debate the quotes. I just found them amusing, which is why I posted them. The one about killing grandma with an axe was particularly funny. I expected others to add some quotes to laugh at, but it seems that everything here turns into Liberal/Conservative bashing.

You are not questioning the government. You are blaming the eastern bastards for the policies of the government you elected. Harper does not need to get rid of the wheat board and he is not that stupid - he knows very well that doing so will not help the farmers (or the family farm). Now you ought to stop whaling about the eastern bastards and blaming all your problems on them and the liberals and you should place your dissatisfaction where it belongs - with the politicians you elected. The eastern bastards didn't vote for him, nor for his policy on the wheat board.

The problem is that the two axes are NOT measuring independent things. I am saying that Left/Right in economics involves authoritarianism. I guess you will have to take a random sample of people, measure them and then show that the two are not independent before you can claim it. Even if they are not independent, they are not perfectly correlated and the second axis provides additional information. In fact, two dimensional graphs are typically used to show a relationship/or lack of it between two factors. Height and weight are related too but what gives you more information - a graph of height vs weight or a graph of height only?

You cannot put two different dimensions on one axis. The test measures two different dimensions, therefore it uses two axes. What's your problem with that?

The Conservatives have funded womens groups, have given public $100 welfare payments to all families with kids, they've given funding for more public programs, they have not done anything about our immigration crisis but instead have pandered for votes, they have given money to the Chinese for head tax.. they've gone spending crazy. You were the first to approve of that.

All i've got to say is my Tory MP, was the only Tory to vote against the wheat board thing. I think the tories should change their stance on this, they aren't Republicans for goodness sakes. You can't be that right wing and succeed in Canada, everybody knows that. MP vote See for yourself http://www.theholmteam.ca/WP.Wilson.pdf The Conservatives don't care what you think because you'll vote for them anyway. The squeaky wheel gets the grease and you won't get your way by praising Inky because supporting the Conservatives means that they will get their way. If you support the government, you support its policies (including dismantling the wheat board) and you don't have the right to complain.

I highly doubt it. I don't think that there is anything the liberals can do that will not be labeled anti-western by westerners. Yes, I am very well aware why stuff is so expensive and that I am being gouged by monopolies/duopolies in many industries. I don't like it but seeing how many Canadians support it, I'm just getting used to it. What exactly do you expect me to do? It's not ok for the Wal-Mart thing and killing small business but that follows your beliefs the closest. As I previously said, you get what you vote for. the clean air act - smokescreen the GST cuts - $100/year should make you rich the accountability act - gags whistleblowers and protects the government/bureaucrats the scrapping of the long gun registry - that solves all your problems figuring a way to solve the wait times - you'll have to wait for that tough on crime - you'll have to wait for that two elected senate - not happening their child care plan - handing out cheques for people to spend any way they want is child care?. I don't see how any of these hurt the east. The only thing that hurts parents who work is the shortage of child-care but that applies to working parents across the country. The logging industry lobbied hard for help. Monsanto did too. So did the recording industry (all 5 companies involved). The banks and the telecoms too. The big food producers are doing the same. The big players lobby and benefit from government policy that protects their control of the industry and lets them push out/take over the small guys. There is nothing new here - it's reality and a matter of time. Now why you expect me to do something about farmers is beyond me. Have you contacted Chuck Strahl on the issue? Maybe you can ask him why he is so determined to dismantle the wheat board. He is the ag minister in the government you elected, so take your complaint to him. All I can tell you is that helping you is against the "free-market" ideology of the Conservatives so don't get your hopes high.

Too bad that the red Tories were flushed down the toilet by Harper and his reformers. If the Liberals can fool people, run from the left and then rule from the right, so can he - run from the center and rule from the far right. He is not openly republican because that won't get him elected.

I disagree. Saturn if left wing. Saturn wants society to do everything Saturn agrees with. Saturn believes that Canadians cannot think for themseves. Saturn must have the control of everyone beleifs. Saturn believes in appointed judges, is anti-religion, and feels judges should dertime what society does. Yet Saturn likes Christmas trees. So Saturn will a disagree when a judge bann's a Christmas tree. Canada should be the personal beleifs of Truedau, Chritein, Martin, and... Saturn; a Liberal. LOL! You are quite funny. Saturn has never been a Liberal. Saturn has never supported appointed anything. The only thing you got right is that Saturn likes X-mas trees. The rest is a product of your imagination.

Complete BS. Harper is dismantling the wheat board because conservative ideology dictates that that's what he should do (not to mention the lobbying of the big guys in the industry who are his loyal supporters too). Dismantling the wheat board is NOT dictated by the WTO or anyone else for that matter. It is simply Harper's choice.

The two are contradictory. This demonstrates that the two axes are false. There should truly be only one axis. In other words, our Economic views are just a subset of our acceptance of Authoritarian standards. I disagree. Many associate the left with authoritarianism (like communism of the eastern european brand). Very few left-wingers would associate themselves that type of "communism". The reality is that left-wingers are generally more concerned with improving the lives of people/society as a whole and authoritarianism goes against that. Left-wing and authoritarian are simply incompatible/contradictory as you noted. But that's not the fault of the two axes - there are still some who would fit in that quadrant (like Stalin). Also, there are plenty of people on the right side who would be in the authoritarian side as well, so the vertical axis is useful to distinguish between the two.

I told you what you want left of center policies, yet you prefer the Conservatives and the two don't add up. Your love of blue is based on something other than policy. It's funny that you are about exactly opposite of Harper and you are such a great fan of his. I find blueblood to be extrememly left wing though. He is left-wing (not extremely left-wing but he seems to support left-wing ideas nevertheless) but he doesn't realize it. He somehow thinks that right-wing ideas are the same as his ideas and he considers himself a right-winger. It could be that he associates libertarianism with right-wing and hence doesn't understand the difference between the two. Hey, blueblood, what are your thoughts on this?

I think that most posters here would actually fall in the right/libertarian quadrant but this test is skewed to show more people as more left than they really are.

I wouldn't be suprised to see a rural Alberta MP in cabinet as Nat. resources or argiculture. There is no rural representation right now (well, some of them are crazy)... That is unless you live in a city, then it's going to be much of the same. The only urban Alberta non-current minister that might get a portfolio is Kenney. What about Ablonczy? Could she get Rona's seat? Or is Harper still afraid that she may be after his seat?

I'd call you "uninformed" aside from "ideological". Martin dolled out the biggest tax cuts this country has ever seen. It was the Tories across the country who screwed the students, but they are too stupid to vote so they deserve it. Seniors get $6,000 in tax free cash annually whenever their incomes are lower than the average salary - those whose incomes are between the average salary and $93,000 still get tax free cash but in smaller amounts - I really don't see seniors suffering. From what I see so far, Harper has really stepped up the tax cuts - increasing income tax rates and taxing income trusts. The students are getting a big break too (must be happening somewhere in the janitors' rooms in parliament because I haven't even heard the Conservatives mention the word "students"). The environment is much better off now that Harper has made it clear that he won't move a finger on the issue. It's just a HUGE shift in policy compared to the liberals.