Wild Bill

Well Molly, I am philosophically totally opposed to the NDP. As for the Liberals, can you tell me what the hell they actually stand for these days? Other than "We're not Harper!" and "We're all new kids, too inexperienced to have done anything corrupt yet!"? I agree that the CPC stinks! So what? Is it some game of tag, where you keep bouncing back and forth, avoiding who ever "dealt it last" and supporting the "second to last"? It's not enough to besmirch a choice. You also have to prove that your alternate is better! Otherwise, why change? That's Salesmanship 101! Even if I were willing to believe that the Liberals in the last couple of years have COMPLETELY changed their spots there's still the problem that Ignatieff has yet to come out with any firm policies on much of anything!

Sorry, Smallc, I consider that to be a specious argument. If protecting non-smokers from passive smoke was the TRUE basis for anti-nicotine laws, then there's no reason why a club or restaurant couldn't choose to be totally smoking, with clear notices above their doors! Any non-smoker who was concerned could simply choose another establishment. That's not the way things work. NO club and NO restaurant ANYWHERE can allow smoking! This is far and beyond what is necessary to protect non-smokers. It simply means that there are very few places for smokers to smoke. Now we have laws preventing people from smoking in their own apartments and movements toward banning it in your own home if you have children. Already smoking is illegal in Ontario in your won car if you have children with you, EVEN IF THE WINDOWS ARE WIDE OPEN OR EVEN IF YOU'RE DRIVING A CONVERTIBLE! There is so much overkill that the idea that it's all about protecting others becomes trivial. It is just another lever to try to discourage smoking. I might at least respect the people behind such measures if they were honest enough to admit they are trying to force others to choose as they want them to do but instead they outright lie and claim to be merely "protecting non-smokers". Incidently, I haven't smoked in years so please, could others refrain from making claims that nicotine addiction has rotted my brain past the ability to think clearly or other ridiculous bunf!

So are you telling me there is a ballot option that I WOULD like the smell?

Well, I would support legal handguns! I would want a cost-effective registry and MUCH more severe MANDATORY penalties for illegal use! Still, I am not worried at all about someone carrying a gun. I probably brush by a few everyday and nothing happens. I am solely worried about CRIMINALS carrying and USING guns! I worry even more that they usually are the ONLY ones with guns! That means the innocent are totally defenseless. If you don't agree, tell it to the family of Jane Creba. Years ago, I was on a business trip to Texas for some sales training. In the evening I was taken to a bar. After a while you couldn't help but notice one fellow in the corner was getting drunk, loud and obnoxious. Suddenly, the dillhole pulled a handgun out and aimed it across the table at his drinking partner. I instantly heard about 8 clicks in rapid succession. It was the sound of a whole bunch of other guys pulling out guns of their own and aiming at the dillhole! Someone said "Don't you think you should calm down, fella?" The dillhole looked around and sheepishly holstered his gun. The bartender came over, talked to him and the fellow got up and left. To a Canadian boy, this was a very frightening experience but afterwards, lying in bed in my hotel room, I couldn't help but think of what would've happened if the bar had been in Toronto. Odds are the dillhole would have been the ONLY one with a handgun! He could have shot the guy at his table, the rest of us for being witnesses and ran out the door. Nobody would have been able to stop him. It's a plain fact that no cop would ever be able to help you in such a situation. They react after the fact, not as it happens. If some wingnut starts shooting up an American schoolyard odds are that someone else with a firearm will take him out very quickly. Here in Canada the shooter can kill dozens of kids before the cops finally show up to stop him. As far as restricting marijuana as we do with tobacco, I've never agreed with the war on nicotine either. I'll go so far as allowing VOLUNTARY smoking and non-smoking areas or clubs/restaurants but I consider the present status quo just social engineering fascism. When you start removing an adult citizen's personal choices you lose both my support and my respect.

Gee, there are some crooked Tories. I guess I shouldn't vote for them. I'll go to the NDP. Whoops! Forgot I have some personal knowledge that they're just as bad. Over to the Liberals. What a minute! I nearly forgot! Adscam! Shawingigate! All that other stuff! Once again, what's changed? We vote for who smells the least. This game of "tit for tat" only succeeds in tarring them ALL with the same brush! It certainly is not going to make someone change their support back to the Liberals just because the Tories are "IT" for the moment in some political game of tag.

Right now drug prohibition has been a dismal failure! One that costs us all billions of dollars a year, totally up in smoke, if you'll pardon the pun. That's a lot of hospital beds and ER nurses! Unless you're prepared to become a true police state with a cop on every corner and paid informers near every small group having a conversation, policing an unpopular law is impossible. All that happens is that Al Capones become rich! So rich that they can afford to pay politicians to keep things illegal to maintain their incredible profit margins. When millions of Canadians do drugs of some kind and millions more don't really disapprove, you are trying to impose a law that is not respected. The situation in America is no different. One would have thought that Americans would have learned from mob ruled Chicago but looking at Miami I guess every generation has to learn for itself, the hard way. I guess I just resent being taxed for a facade, to please some damn social engineers who want to tell everyone else what to do!

Why would that matter? It's not as if they were in a competitive situation. The CBC gets its funding regardless of its ratings. Although CBC Radio does moderately well in ratings, CBC TV has always had lame and poor ratings compared to Global and CTV. Frankly, the other outlets couldn't care less about any CBC trade secrets! Many times I have been at televised events and watched how the CBC would have many times the number of people involved with cameras, cables and such compared with any other media outlet. The old joke about city workers filling potholes, where one guy mans the shovel and 12 guys watch him is quite true when the CBC covers an event. If anyone wants to tell me I'm wrong, just go to any such event yourself! You can see them with your own eyes! You can reach out and touch them, if you get close enough. I would love to see a release of their expenses, particularly as regards salaries! There's long been a saying in journalism circles that if all you care about is a fat paycheck then you should work for the CBC.

If you're going to argue that "something may have been hidden", "it's a conspiracy!" or any other "what if" positions then debate is useless. "What if" Harper is actually a "V" reptilian setting us up to have all our water stolen? (classic V, of course!)

It would seem you've never actually read her words. You're just echoing those of her critics. "Me, me, and only me"? Yes, but what does that mean? Her critics claim that it means don't do anything for anyone else. Nothing could be more wrong! The important point is "I CHOOSE for myself!" There's nothing wrong with doing something for a friend or a loved one. There's nothing wrong in contributing to a charity that you believe in, either. A Randite might give his life for his child, or bail out a friend from financial difficulty, or support the SPCA if they love animals, as long as HE chooses for his child, HE chooses who his friends are and HE chooses where his charity goes! Contrast that with our present system. The state TAKES your money and IT decides where it should go! Somebody ELSE decides who's child should be saved, who should receive financial aid and how charity dollars should be spread around. Not only do you get no choice in giving the money, no choice as to who receives it and no choice as to which charities are deserving, you don't even get any credit for giving it! It's merely your social and civic duty! What a load of crap! Even worse, usually the ones taking your money live higher on the hog than you do, since they are designated "special"! The government steals my money. I have no power to stop that but I don't have to believe they are in the right. I can only hope that at least some trickles down to keep the roads plowed. Meanwhile I do what I can for myself, my family, friends and the Sally Ann. I choose the Sally Ann 'cuz if I toss a ten spot in their bucket I know that $9.95 will actually go to do some good! If it goes to the United Way, only the nickel might do some good. The rest gets eaten up in "delivery services" and "internal costs". You really ought read Rand before you criticize.

I could never vote NDP unless they changed A LOT, Dr. G! I abhor socialism. I consider it just a way of ripping off the "Little Red Hen". After reading books like Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and Orwell's "Animal Farm" I consider the NDP's philosophy despicable! I am willing to grant that many of its followers are well-intentioned but sadly poor in the thinking department. As for the Liberals, they have no policies, no philosophy and with Ignatieff - no experience! I might as well vote for a high school students' council. So what if Harper is anti-pot? It won't stop a single soul who wants to make their own choice. So what if he throws some bones to the Fundies? He won't allow any new laws that seriously cater to the Evangelicals. He knows he would just lose all the other votes! That leaves somebody like me with all his other positions in government. I have some issues with what he WON'T do but most of what he HAS or WILL done jives with my own feelings. I suspect it's far easier for you. From all your postings that I've read you seem to care solely and only about legalizing drug laws. Harper could intend to start a war with North Korea and if he was also going to legalize pot I think you'd support him! I don't mean this to be insulting. I'm just pointing out that if you care about anything besides one and only one issue when deciding which party to vote for you've yet to post anything about it.

I'm missing something here, BC. I can understand how you might disagree with the good Dr. but is it your position that Prohibition IS a successful and cost-effective policy? I would REALLY like to hear how you could defend that one! Drug lords making fortunes because of their products being illegal will be cheering for you!

Dr. G., there was a good article in the Post yesterday. I'd reference more but the wife has already thrown the issue out. Anyhow, it was written by someone who had worked with Harper at the NCC for years. He found it amusing how so many folks keep insisting that Harper is some kind of "fundy" with religion. In all the years he worked beside him he saw absolutely no sign of it! In fact, he found him not very religious at all. It seems to be simply kneejerk, ad hominem leftie propaganda. They don't like him so that's a scary label to hang on him. This jives with what I knew of the man in the Reform days. Still, the writer stated that Harper is not above paying lip service to the religious right. He will advance some position or bill that appears to cater to them but it will either be rather unimportant in the grand scheme of things or expected to never pass in Parliament anyway! Apparently, the religious right is not that happy with Harper either. To them, he never really delivers what they want but they have no one else to support. Boy, to someone like me does that sound familiar! I scanned the headlines this morning and it would appear that Harper is quietly advising his MPs to vote against an abortion bill. He's not whipping the vote but it's obvious he doesn't want it to pass. This is consistent with what I heard him tell the Reform Party years ago. He had said that if the party became to fixated on religion and social engineering concepts they would be doomed to repeatedly lose! So he's allowed an abortion Bill to arise as a bone to the fundies but he'll make sure it will never pass. So he's not a "fundy" at all, Dr. G. You're just hanging an ad hominem label on the man. He is actually something quite different...a Machiavelli with a touch of Goebbels! He is a master of appearing to stand for something a political demographic wants without actually ever giving it to them! Fundamentalist religion is just one of the areas that he does such a tactic. This was another of old Chretien's talents! He would make the Liberal Party appear to be all things to all people while never actually having any firm principles at all! What a difference from Manning, who had a firm list of principles that you could examine and decide if you agreed. If he couldn't get enough agreement to get you on board, Manning would try to further persuade you and could always fall back on the party platform of representing the people first and foremost. You were free to try to persuade sufficient numbers of other party members to your view and if you succeeded it became new party policy. Believe it or not, if Reform had ever formed the government and enough citizens in each riding had told their Reform MP that they wanted marijuana legalized the MP would have voted for it! Could anyone say that about MPs from the other parties? Who are the REAL fundamentalists? Harper just tempts you with what you want, dangling a carrot that you can never grab! He tells the party what it stands for, not the other way around, knowing full well that you don't have a better choice and will have to stick with him anyway. So don't worry about the fundamentalist Christians in the CPC. They'll be disappointed too!

You are making an assumption, Dr. The right is far more than just social conservatives. To a Libertarian like myself, the Left is a worse disease! In all these years the Left has never come up with a working definition of how money is actually earned or created. They are all about wealth distribution, which means in order to distribute it they have to take it from someone. Since there are so many, many more working people than rich corporations even though working people make far less even simple math shows that together they offer FAR more income to be taxed than the rich! You could take ALL of the rich and the corporations' money and it still would be nowhere near as much as you can pick from the working man's pocket! It's just like the old story of the Little Red Hen, on a grander scale. If Canada was ever ruled for too long by a centre left coalition I would begin to fear for my children's future, to the point where I would consider having my family escape such a regime!

Jack, you and the good Dr. are coming up with some great smartass insults but it's starting to get a bit tiresome. If we wanted ad hominem debate we could all hang out on "rubble.com". Maybe we could all get back to debating actual points and positions?

This link refers to a Mike Colle. I don't know if he's still around. The article is interesting, though. http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/912

As a fellow "screwee" I wish you luck! I would advise however that you spend some time googling up some research. A LOT of people have already tried to fight! You wouldn't want to waste energy and resources re-inventing the wheel, or repeating other peoples' mistakes. There are some high profile politicians that are active 407 opponents who have had some successes over the years and would be worth consulting. A united front is always more effective.

Who said I was a believer in "big power"? Obviously, you haven't read many of my posts. I've stated before that I believe the best system would be to get off the grid entirely and be free of political influence! The problem with your scenario is that when the wind isn't blowing the central grid HAS to have the capability to supply enough power! That's why wind and even solar forces the grid to have sufficient backup generation. That was the main point of my last post! Didn't you actually read it? As for individuals selling surplus power, McGuinty is away ahead of you! He has come out with his "MicroFit" program. You could put up a windmill or cover your roof in solar cells. Your existing power demands would stay as they have always been with you having a meter and paying 3.5 cents per Kw or whatever. Your "green power" would be fed to the grid through another meter and you would be paid 13.5 cents/kw for wind power and 80 cents for solar! Sounds great until you examine the details. First off, you can't install your own systems. They have to be installed by "approved" contractors using "approved" equipment. The excuse is to make sure things are safe. However, you now have to pay whatever those contractors and approved manufacturers want to charge. Normally, you can wire up your own house to save money and as long as its inspected by an Ontario Power inspector before you hook up to the mains its ok! So it's no surprise that your installation will be very expensive. Your payback is likely to be at least 10-15 years. You will have put up perhaps $40,000 of your own money to get in the game. Now if a lot of people enrol in this program that is going to be a HUGE financial burden on Ontario Power Corp to pay 80 cents/kwh! When it gets to a considerable sum it will certainly become a burden on the company's profitability. Of a certainty, the province will have to bail them out! The money will become an issue and there will be questions about how can taxpayers afford it! Now McGuinty's plan is based on a 20 year contract but what happens if we have a different government or maybe even a new Liberal government who decides we just can't afford the subsidy and pulls the plug on all the contracts! If you haven't had enough time to at least reach breakeven then you lose a big chunk of your investment! Worse yet, you can't even use the installation for your own power! There's no battery bank! You would have to pony up for an expensive battery system to get some use out of the installation. In many American States they have systems more like you propose. People have their own off-grid power system but they have a bi-directional meter. If they have surplus power the meter is driven "backwards", reducing your bill and perhaps even driving up a small profit for yourself! This allows a modest battery bank that is not so expensive. You ALWAYS have power for yourself and if at times you need more than your own system has available you can draw extra from the grid, replacing it when demand is lower. Now McGuinty's plan ensures that you HAVE to stay connected to Ontario Power! Your own power comes in the same way it always has. You do NOT get any of your wind or solar produced power! That is fed through a separate meter onto the grid. Since you retain your regular utility account then you also keep getting billed that fee to eventually pay off that "stranded debt" of 30 some odd BILLION dollars for the patronage, slush funds and general ripoff of the nuclear power plants for all those years. McGuinty's MicroFit program does not encourage a user to use his wind and solar power for himself first, selling only the excess. The "normal" electricity account stays active, charging us for that ripoff debt. Would you care to comment if this is by accident or deliberate design?

Tammy, I'm not a lawyer but I think you will find that yes, if it came to court a company would have to prove to a judge that you actually had a delinguent account and that you indeed owe them money. Otherwise, anybody could claim anything! However, over the past few decades there's been a new attitude among some businesses and individuals about how to use the law. They know before they start a suit that they shouldn't win but they figure they can afford to drag it out and run the costs up better than their opponent! So most of the time their opponent, or more properly their victim, can't afford the fight so they just give up. 407 knows that it is a hardship for folks like you and me to take them to court for a few hundred dollars. Odds are it means time off of work and maybe even lawyer fees. So we just moan and live with it. Many people mistakenly believe that they have some protection by using small claims court. If someone ripped them off on a home renovation or a vehicle repair they think they can take them to court and win without spending too much money in fees. What they don't know is that you can win your case and then the defendant still doesn't pay you! Winning in small claims court is not enough! At that level there is no mechanism to force him to immediately pay you. You have to go back to court to seek a judgement to force him to pay, often involving garnashees and court seizure of assets. If the defendant who ripped you off has skipped town or gone out of business there may be nobody for you to chase! Patents are supposed to protect new ideas but I've seen a number of times how in the States a big company will send a letter threatening to sue a smaller company for infringing on their patent for a guitar amplifier based on vacuum tube designs that have been public domain for 50 years! How it works is, the big company applies for a patent on something that as I said, is really an old design. The US patent office doesn't spend the money or resources searching to see if the design is old and/or public domain. What they do is just automatically issue the patent! They seem to feel that if the patent is invalid then somebody will challenge it in court and the patent will be struck down. This of course means the companies involved spend the money, not the US patent office. What makes the situation unfair is that the big company has more money for lawyers. If they spot a small company that is starting to become a significant competitor they can use the patent law to scare the little guys out of the market! It's not right and it's not fair but it happens a LOT! Actually, we Canadians seem worse than most folks for having a naive, child-like faith in the Law and its institutions! We think that just because it's written down somewhere that it will always be enforced and will always be fair. Nothing could be further from the truth! Too often, all that matters is how expensive a lawyer you can afford. The 407 has had extensive political connections since it bought the highway. Many of our politicians hold big chunks of stock! It charges the highest tolls in the world! It is literally a license to print money. With so many politicians making money from it it is not surprising that we citizens enjoy so little protection from being fleeced. Tammy, is your MPP a Liberal? If so, perhaps you can contact someone in an Opposition party who might be willing to help.

Tammy, it's the 407! This is a unique case. The 407 couldn't care less about right or wrong! They only care about getting money. They know that disputes involve small sums, which means it's difficult and time consuming for a customer to make a complaint. They can run him around for years and never worry about any backlash. They ran me around for over 10 years. Finally, thanks to McGuinty, I couldn't get my licence plate renewal until I paid them over $200 for an account I didn't have with them! I paid, so that I could still drive, but my first stop was my MPP's office. Those folks were great! The lady there had a "secret" phone number to talk to a real person at the 407 office, which was more than I was ever able to find out! It took a couple more weeks but eventually it was finally all straightened out. A google will quickly show you that as of a few years ago there were more than 800,000 billing complaints against the 407! Lord knows how high the figure is today! There have been government inquiries and such but all we've gotten is a lot of talk. I advise you to just go to your MPP. Nothing else seems to work with those people.

Once again, someone has ignored the most important fallacy about wind power! Don't feel bad. Most people do, since most people have no idea at all how electricity and generation systems actually WORK! If you put up a wind turbine, you immediately have a new problem. It only works when the wind blows! What do you do when the wind stops? If its a home system you can invest in a large and expensive battery bank. This is totally impossible to do on a large scale setup like a provincial power grid that feeds all our cities and towns. The necessary battery technology just doesn't exist! It may be invented someday, but don't expect it by next weekend. So you HAVE to build a new backup generator for those windless hours and days! This means a generator that can instantly turn on and run as long as is needed, obviously on some kind of fuel. This means coal, gas, hydro or nuclear. In other words, our traditional sources! Now you have the cost of both the windmills AND the backup generator! Why not simply run the backup generator by itself? Far cheaper! Some folks will jump in and say "Well, the wind may stop in Windsor but it is still blowing in North Bay! So if we build enough windmills we can always get our clean power from somewhere!" Once again, this only makes sense if you don't have the background to be aware of the details. Our electricity is handled by a large scale grid that covers the whole province and by extension out to other provinces and states in the USA. There are technical problems that need to be controlled when switching sources and loads over such big distances. Our grid is nowhere near advanced enough to have that capability. Again, it would need a LOT of money spent on improvements, some of which have yet to be invented! So yes, in THEORY windmills work! They just don't work on a large enough scale. To make them work as we want them to means we will have to spend BAGS AND BAGS OF MONEY! Right now McGuinty is floating wind and solar power with big subsidies. A subsidy is just having our taxes pay the difference. The money still has to come from somewhere! And before you say its all worth it to become "green", understand that we're not talking an extra 10% on our electricity bills. We're talking double or triple our present bills! Could any politician sell that to his citizens and expect to stay elected? What could he say to all the manufacturing plants who would go bankrupt paying those kind of fees and would be forced to leave the province for a cheaper jurisdiction? Hell Margrace, plants are leaving right NOW for that very reason! Maybe you have some different physics on your end of your driveway and things work by magic.

Yeah, like the governor being in the existing bridge owner's pocket, it would seem.

It's the seals' own damn fault! They wouldn't be facing a population explosion and have a harder time finding enough food if they had just respected the size limits on small cod fish! If they had just respected the conservation laws they wouldn't be in this mess! Oh well, at least the sharks are now well fed. Great Whites have been eating so much seal that now they're experiencing a population explosion! http://www.capelinks.com/cape-cod/main/entry/too-many-seals-not-enough-sharks/

I've been practising my own private boycotts for some years now. I try to avoid Chinese products when I can and now I have been doing the same for what comes from the EU. I have no illusions that by myself I can have much effect but it makes me feel better! I have always believed that you sometimes need to do unto others as they have done unto you, for purposes of education. It does brighten my day when I am in the supermarket reading the "country of origin" on a can of vegetables and I find someone beside me doing the same thing. The numbers may not be significant but it's nice to know I'm not alone!

Well, there was a LOT of alcohol-related violence and crime before Prohibition ended!

Good point! Who the hell cares? If you're responsible then you're responsible! It's not as if being drunk or stoned is a good excuse! You got yourself drunk or stoned, after all.