Moonlight Graham

well that would certainly be one big flaw of strong socialism (and citizens were allowed to move freely), that all the skilled people would leave to get more money elsewhere

Uh oh, a Nazi blast!

No. But a major policy that is voted on by parliament is more democratic, and hence generally more legitimate, than a policy that is decided on by one human being aka the PM/executive. I am of the firm belief that most policies should be voted on by parliament whenever practically possible. The powers of the executive in a democracy should be limited as much as possible, and the executive should only make policy decisions by themselves when it is entirely impractical or may weaken national security etc. if it were to go through parliament. I don't mind a few extra powers going to the exec in the name of checking the powers of the other branches of gov't, but even these should be carefully given. Harper making a major foreign relations & national security decision which could easily go through parliament is bullcrap.

well i'm not sure it's quite 2 to 1 yet, but it's getting close, Wiki says about 400,000 Jews, 700,000 muslims in Canada. No, this doesn't make a lot of sense in terms of votes. However, lobbies, and the money that comes with their support, is different beast than raw pop #'s.

Ridiculous. Make it a vote in Parliament, for the sake of legitimacy.

Well, we'd probably all die because nothing would get done. Who would grow our food? Or drive the trucks to transport it? Gov'ts around the world would collapse due to non-production, and the meek with erectile dysfunction would inherit the earth. And of course over-population would be a problem. The kids wouldn't get fed by their horny parents, so they would die, and their rotting corpses would spread disease and further destroy the human race. Mother nature is a smart lady (i'd probably bang her too).

I've been thinking the same thing since i was 12 years old. Sometimes i wish i could have a nice rack just for a day. What a wonderful day in the bathroom that would be!

This is what i thought at first too, but after some thought I'm really a bit skeptical. Politicians, especially those on our Hill, don't often take tough/controversial "principled" stands on issues unless it is somehow to their political gain to do so. I'm honestly torn. And when it comes to politics, when in doubt, err on the side of politicians being lying power-hungry sacks of crap.

thats impossible. i never make mistakes.

The U.S. must invade both Iran and N.Korea then.

This was clearly launched by Iran in a show of aggressive force. The US must invade Iran now.

Bah! The vast majority of people don't smoke because its "dangerous", they smoke cuz its makes them feel good. Peer presure does play a part, but peer pressure is the same for legal drugs such as cigarettes and alcohol.

I say we give full scholarships to anyone who wishes to become a medical doctor, provided they stay in Canada to practice medicine for a given period. In this sense, scholarships alone wouldn't work because its not practical to prevent people from leaving the country. Canada would need to give a monetary incentive for doctors to stay in Canada.

You want real change? Severely clamp down on the campaign finance system & lobbying that goes on in Washington.

Well, if i can't get him to sign it, would you sign it for me?

It looks like an interesting book for sure no matter one's leanings. I may even pick it up. Do you think he would sign it for me?

From cbc.ca re: info revealed in Bush's new memoir: More details from the book: Wow Cheney getting the boot, that would have been nice.

Men are sluts. They are much less picky than women. Isn't this a given? A man will jump anything with tits under 200 lbs. Sometimes including farm animals. Seriously, this is a bit of a ridiculous threads. We are sluts!!! If women were as slutty as men nothing in this world would get done. People would just be having sex everywhere at random throughout the day.

This tacky to the extreme, and really makes no commercial sense. And for the record, the commercialism of Christmas and Easter is equally disgusting. But i've been raised to love my Cadbury chocolate eggs and shiny electronics wrapped under the Jesus Tree. If i ever have kids hopefully i'll be smart enough not to spoil them on Xmas morning as much as i was.

Do we not also help the Chinese economy by having Canadian products manufactured in China, like so many other nations? I doubt this falls under the "imports" label. Does anyone know how much in manufacturing business Canada gives to the Chinese? I'm curious to see exactly how large (or small) the number is. If it is somewhat significant this could be leverage for Canada re: China.

Yes i think consumerism is a key factor. However, other huge factors include the advent of the birth control pill for women in the 1960's. The baby boomer women now had control of their own bodies and didn't pump out babies when their husbands chose not to wear condoms. The big women's movement that began in the 1960's also was huge. Women wanted to be more equal to males in many regards, and thought they should have the right to have full careers of their own outside the home and not stay at home and be Miss Homemaker with 5 kids. So now they have 1 or 2 kids and ship them to daycare and/or full-day kindergarten and go back to work. There are certainly many contributing reasons for the low birthrate in Caucasian-dominated western countries. But if there's one thing that would certainly increase the birthrate, it would be to ban the birth control pill...but we know that will never happen.

Hadn't seen the idea mentioned before on these forums, though i know mine isn't an original idea generally. Both are excellent points. It would be very risky politically for a party to propose such. There would certainly be vote losses in key places like the GTA. Parties now seem to do the opposite, by being quite supportive of immigration/multiculturalism etc. in order to appeal the ever-increasing immigrant/visible minority voters in Canada. I agree that immigration is beneficial, and that we should be more selective. It certainly isn't about racism, as i would be very much against it if say the U.K. offered to send us most of their Caucasians who are or had been in prison. It's about the quality of people we let it in. Making it mandatory for immigrants to have a full-time job offer would make it too difficult i would think. And i agree that family reunification should be limited. ie: bringing in older family members does nothing but add to our population problem.

Instead of letting poor quality immigrants into the country and spending money on processing them, paying for them to be on welfare etc., and giving them access to publicly funded systems like healthcare and heavily subsidized post-secondary education that many Canadians have been paying into for their whole lives (as have their parents and grandparents etc.), how about we instead take some of that money and pay couples who are already Canadian to have more children? Oh and this money may also have the benefit of possibly giving couples more of an incentive to have one of the parents stay home and actually raise their damn kids instead of sending them off to strangers at day care...which will also likely be publicly funded someday soon.

So if you were walking down the street at night with your wife and young kids and a guy with a knife jumped out and attacked you & your family, and you managed to punch him and he fell to the ground, are you saying you would "do the manly thing" and wait for him to get back up and start attacking you & your family again instead of beating the crap out of him while he's on the ground to disarm/incapacitate him? Ya right!

LOL wtf??? Why not just vote, then not tell people who you voted for...like many others in the media do. Man what a moron.