madmax

Where do you live? And what on earth are you talking about?

Is there anyone involved in manufacturing posting in this forum? PM me if so.

That's a silly tactic used by the Federalists. The Europeans have no issue using the same currency at the same rates everywhere in the EU. France and Germany have stronger economies than Spain and Portugal, but it's all the same rate. There is no reason why we can't apply the same principle in Canada between politically seperated provinces. The Europeans are trying to Unify and have chosen a value of currency to compete against the US dollar. Canada has no such ability and perhaps there are those that would argue the Provinces should have different exchange rates. I wasn't suggesting the breakup of Canada or the threat of a different dollar as a means to ensure federalism. I was putting it out there for people to play with, the idea of having a separate dollar for the Provinces, should the separtists ever prevail

If Ontario can't separate from itself, then should Quebec or Alberta ever leave, would there be " the NEW DOLLAR of ONTARIO" and would it have a Separate Exchange rate from Alberta. Ontario .70US Alberta 1.155US Quebec ????? Have some fun where would the other Provinces be.....

The answers from the Government regarding torture, have been inept, incompetent and detrimental to the mission in Afghanistan.

I don't believe that any vote is a wasted vote. I don't believe that votes "naturally" go to one party or another. It is my opinion that such thinking is disrespectful towards the electorate.

What if Ontario Separated from the rest of Canada?

I'd put him and Roosvelt on a league with Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini, Bernardo and Pickton. Most Canadians do not know about this period in our history. I would not say that King was the worst Prime Minister. I don't know of another leader who stood up for the Jews during this period. I also would question whether there was a leader in Canada of any stripe who would have spoke up for the Jews prior to WW2.

Sir John A MacDonald. The worst Prime Minister? Scandal Plagued, Drunk? All sorts of things. But not the worst Prime Minister IMHO.

R.B. Bennett. The worst Prime Minister of Canada. This should be enough to draw out Geoffrey.

I think that this is the problem with an ideological leader.

That's a tough pill to swallow. What I find interesting is that Norway has roughly the same amount of oil & gas as Alberta, and Norway has $250 Billion in their 'heritage fund' from oil royalties after 10 years, vs Alberta's $12 Billion after 31 years. Perhaps you are getting short changed for the prices you are paying. However, for your information, here are the prices aroung the globe for Gas in USD. Venezuala is where you get the cheap stuff. Norway is right at the top. Have to do your own litre to gallons calculations. Netherlands Amsterdam $6.48 Norway Oslo $6.27 Italy Milan $5.96 Denmark Copenhagen $5.93 Belgium Brussels $5.91 Sweden Stockholm $5.80 United Kingdom London $5.79 Germany Frankfurt $5.57 France Paris $5.54 Portugal Lisbon $5.35 Hungary Budapest $4.94 Luxembourg $4.82 Croatia Zagreb $4.81 Ireland Dublin $4.78 Switzerland Geneva $4.74 Spain Madrid $4.55 Japan Tokyo $4.24 Czech Republic Prague $4.19 Romania Bucharest $4.09 Andorra $4.08 Estonia Tallinn $3.62 Bulgaria Sofia $3.52 Brazil Brasilia $3.12 Cuba Havana $3.03 Taiwan Taipei $2.84 Lebanon Beirut $2.63 South Africa Johannesburg $2.62 Nicaragua Managua $2.61 Panama Panama City $2.19 Russia Moscow $2.10 Puerto Rico San Juan $1.74 Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91 Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78 Egypt Cairo $0.65 Nigeria Lagos $0.38 Venezuela Caracas $0.12

I don't know how true your assessment is. If gas companies are getting free handouts and making huge returns in profit that most people are unable to comprehend. Then there is movement in many areas. Prices could be reduced by removing the GST on Gas. That was a Conservative Promise IIRC. People could receive the monies gifted to Gas Companies by our governments or have these monies put into services that people require. I see no reason to give gas companies my money while they are making huge profits and gouging us at the pumps. These Gas companies are not charities. So why are we treating them as such? There is a perception that these prices in Canada are artificially high. Shouldn't this money that we pay to make the Gas companies filthy rich, be the monies that goes into meeting the CPCs less than ambitious targets? I am not a fan of the tax on a tax. It was the CPC and it's predecessors that wanted this gouging at the pumps removed. But now it's ok? Don't be hiding behind massive profits of gas companies, and blaming something that hasn't even occurred. There are Big Profits being made, and the consumer is the one forking out the cash and subsidizing the industry.

What Government? What do you mean, taxing oil companies and passing it onto consumers? Building Refineries in Canada, should never be overlooked. With Refineries comes many environmental troubles. Finding locations, where people will accept such a venture in their own backyard, is often a difficult process.

You are comparing market forces vs political forces. The political forces give our Money to Multi Billion Dollar Companies in the oil sector. This does not "Save the Planet". Meanwhile these multi billion dollar companies are making billions and billions in profit. So why give them our money. The money that we give them also comes from the GST tax on gas which is a tax upon tax. Meanwhile, gas companies and the government revenues go up markedly as the price of fuel becomes inflated, because of investor speculation and greed. None of which has anything to do with the environment. Today they are talking up the market to have gas reach $100. a barrel. Regardless, you appear to enjoy tax upon tax, like the Liberals and Conservatives. So if gas prices increase, it is ok, because Canadians like getting taxed more.

The GST on Gas is a Tax on a Tax.

The story is the one provided that starts this link. Justifying such childish behaviour that is supposed to govern us, shows how badly our government is failing the people of Canada. It's hard to believe that we pay for such behaviour in the house, committee and Senate. When are adults going to govern our country, and do it on the behalf of the people whom elected them. I have absolutely no use for the constant whining and defence used by the CPC that the LPC did it first. Infact, like many posters on this forum suggest, the CPC under Harper have managed to behave like Liberals in record time.

I think you are being premature. The were two right wing parties, and the Liberals certainly weren't holding to Tory style traditions. Neither were the Reform/Alliance. But those Tories are working their networks again, as the neo liberal economic policies start to show major chinks in their armour. Chinks that had been cleared up by Progressive Conservatives in the past. Joe Clark to support Liberals that share none of these values is very confusing to me. It does fall in line with many of Joe Clarks political decisions made over his career. On top of this, I can't figure out these band of Liberals at all. They are so far out in left field, that they are challenging the Green party for votes. These Liberals don't appear to be stealing NDP ideas to campaign from, but are choosing to fight the NDP by cosying up with the Greens. The NDP numbers though are remaining higher then when there was a split in the Right between the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance. Then the NDP was in single digits. Perhaps Joe Clark hasn't figured out where the Progressives have found a new home yet? I don't believe they went to the Liberals, but have split their votes among the other parties.

I am not going to touch alot of that with the ten foot pole. I already feel dirty. I must reverse those comments regarding the religious element. You are correct in that regard. I was thinking more along the lines that the "moral majority" had yet to make an impact into the Reagan period, in the same manner as they did during the GWB era in which the Moral Majority had morphed into a larger Social Conservative movement. Reading the stuff you have printed on Nixon, however, leads me to wonder why you manage to point fingers at some Adscam bureaucrats and elected officials. Hardly the same league. Infact these guys don't rate anything like the Iran/Contra, or the march to war against Iraq. Nixon was caught for what he was. Luckily for Bush, the American public has no pallet for another impeachment, to which GWB might be worthy of the process. Regardless, Harper is no Reagan. So, does Joe Clark really support the Liberals?

Other banks are open to competition. Canadian Banks are not and would be swallowed up. I really don't see the need for larger Canadian Banks. There profits are good, they are well protected and have a captive market.

I cannot put together the header and the content of your post. If you wanted to have another discussion on Kyoto, why didn't you just put the header as: Another thread in which to discuss Kyoto. Your statement above has no indication on whether you think him more Alliance or More Conservative. Let alone Progressive Conservative. However, if I were a Liberal, I wouldn't be talking about the environment. Particularly the treaty they signed and yet did nothing to attempt to honour it.

You have me in stitches. You may be right about the trial, I haven't followed it. But I do not need a trial to form an opinion of Conrad Black, based on many other actions. Conrad Black just may be able to use his pompous attitude of priveledge to his advantage. I couldn't be more pleased that he is no longer a Canadian citizen. He attempted to steal other peoples money in the past to use for his own purposes. He destroyed companies with no regrets, and managed to walk away from the wrecks he created. There are a number of cities in which Conrad Black would not receive a warm welcome.

Absolutely none. But, I recall Born Losers, and the first Billy Jack movie. I can't remember the 2nd one at all. Billy Jack should be a Republican or Independant. Billy Jack was the violent no bullshit good guy with a chip on his shoulder. He was a Clint Eastwood figure and Ironically embraced by the peace movement. The idea of pacifism to solve everything, just didn't work with Billy Jack. Go ahead and hate your neighbour.

The topic is Afghanistan. You want to hear yourself speak, start a thread dedicated to your views. It would be wise to make an effort to place it in the appropriate forum. It won't be very long before you are tuned out, if you go off topic.

May made no comparison of the sort.She compared people who do nothing to stop global warming to people (like Neville Chamberlain) who appeased the Nazis in the 1930s. In Elizabeth May's mindset, global warming is as much a threat to Western Civilization as the Nazis were. Lame Lame Lame. 1967100 clearly states that May did this indirectly. Such as, I am not saying this other people are saying this, so I will just repeat what they are saying. Or more importantly, I believe this so much that I am going to hide behind the person that actually said it. Here is a really good denial, which I also disagree with. http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/web...torial&classif= Such cowardice need not be rewarded with deflection of the intent. Her intent was clear, regardless of who said it, or if others have made such analogies. She said it, and her intent was to imbed a vision in the parishers minds. Obviously these over the top analyses do no one anygood. No more then this poll which has only one legitimate answer.