Alta4ever

Leave it for the provincial governments, as really these are their responsiblity. Before Trudeau there was very little incursion from Ottawa in Provincial matters.

I forgot the contraction it shouldn't survive. I am of the firm belief that the government should not be in the business of proping up causes, non-profit organizations, and companies. If it is truely needed and wanted society will suport it through volunteer effort, and donations. As for business the same goes it people really want it the will buy the good or service and those with good business practices will survive, those that don't, won't.

Its something that you do in the first year of a majority gov.

This just sets up the government to start to reduce unneeded social service spending.

Now it sounds like you defending donation tax credits. If it can't survive on its merit, it should survive.

I wasn't defending the religious organizations tax subsidies, I was pointing out that people actively support the religious organizations through donations, and that they couldn't survive if the people that attended didn't donate. The CBC isn't the same if they had to rely on donations instead of taxpayer funding they would not survive in their current form. I think that this should be the case will all organizations, they should never operate on the taxpayer dime or receive tax payer subidies, if what they provide is of value to the community, then private citizens will support it through charity.

Prior to Churches being tax exempt, you didn't get a tax subsidy for your donation. Not to mention that person still had a net loss of $610 and the $1000 is stii lout of pocket, the donation might just reduce the tax bill and not result in a refund), if we look at it from your persepctive. When I donate to various organizations, I don't think about the tax implications, and I would bet most others don't either. The government doesn't pay for religion (if people didn't donate the church would fail), but not the same for the CBC its tax payer funded, even if the majority of the public doesn't want it, the majority still has to pay, so the small minority can have it. By the way I don't have a church, and I feel that all organizations can do without the help of the taxpayers, we should not be subsidzing anything.

People donate to keep the religious source open and active voluntarily it is not do by tax payers money, and before you argue the tax break line, it is only in the last 30 years or so that churches have become tax exempt. Now donation to the CBC is manditory, they get it through taxes. They do not have to survive on the merits of their work.

How many times do we need to re-record the same music to be played on the radio, seems like a waste of resources.

When its the only tradition that links Canadians together, you gotta fit in the American bashing where ever you can.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHa! Just like we've said all along, the liberals have never been concerned with what they say Canadians want, just when and how they are going to get back into power. They are absolutely shameless!

Many good points. We don't know the other side of the story, all we know and all the media focuses on is what Brenda and her friends and family are saying. The media is using the story to sell more papers and increase ratings. There is so much emotional hype around this that many people aren't stopping to ask questions. For instance, What cook gets 20,000+ in severance pay for ten months of work? (maybe the hells kitchen guy) Why was she working in Mexico with a Visa or work permit?

The answer is simiple reduce spending on social policies, stream line the various forms of government, and reduce the taxes paid by everyone. But the socialist in this country would disagree, they would rather have the money taken from families filtered through different levels of government, costing the public purse for every level, before giving just pennies back for every dollar those tax payers paid.

IF you bought for long term you really have nothing to worry about, the value will come back up. It was the short term flippers that got burned, they bought high and tried to sell high. Very Stupid in investement terms as the risk is very high hire, as you are investing a lot of money in a very localized market, usually on borrowed money that is very close to or over your borrowing limit.

Treating things as confidence motions is pushing their adjenda through that is the job of the government. 300million, that is a small sacrifice for democracy, and I happly pay taxes to fund elections. I do not happily pay taxes for incusions into provincial jurisdictions, ie. Healthcare transfer payments, infrastructure transfer payments, policing transfer payments, and wealth transfer payments in general. It is up to provincial governments to fund these things. Decrease federal taxes and increase provincial taxes to pay for them.

All of those costs are policing costs not war on drugs costs, as those items would still be required by policy forces. Lawyers, judges and prison guards, what percentage of there time is spend on drug offences? MOst of the time users get to serve there time in the comfort of their own homes. I would be will to bet that the government spends less the 1 billion a year directly on drug prevention. Plant based medicines can be just as dangerous as those produce by pharm comanies. Just because it is plant based doesn't mean it isn't dangerous, ie morphine, made from poppy seed, a very dangerous drug. A just so you know THC is a mild form of LSD and prolonged use can have a detrimental impact on your memory.

I certainly am not earning over more then 100 grand a year, infact if you check into the pervious fund raising records before Chretien brought in the donation limits, you would have found that most of the rich corporate donors donated to the Liberal party of Canada (vested interests).

If they don't agree with the governments policies and bills then yes they should force an election, that is their responsibility as the offical opposition. IF the majority of Canadian agree with them they will vote for them in an election. IF They do not vote against the government then they should vote with the government. Those who vote for the sitting liberal MPs deserve better and need representation, and when their MP's don't vote they loose their reprenstation in the government. Why dock the CPC Mp's THEY ARE DOING THE JOB THEY WERE SENT THERE TO DO!

Not true the CPC represents the working middle class. The Liberals represent vested interests and the NDP represents the vocal insterests. Last I checked the NDP was and very left leaning socialist party, they are not center left.

Its not transfer it is trade. Transfer implies giving something for nothing in return.

How about it be based on true risk assement and insurance premiums have a base component that is underwritten on lifestyle choices. Keep in mind that insurance companies can be forced by legisaltion to insure all comers. I doubt that the paltry sum that is spend on the war on drugs would make a lick of difference for healthcare needs. When we look at just Albertas health care needs the health budget is expected to eclipse the entire Alberta budget in ten years. The couple of hundreds of millions set aside for combating drugs across Canada would never make a dent.

Fine if you see it that way ingest what ever you want, but if we go that way, then the tax payer should not have to foot the bill for your health care, you shaould be required to find your own health insurance and pay the extra amounts for the added risk to the system.

If we had an NDP offical opposition, that would mean most likely a Conservative Majority and we would still be in Afganistan. NDP Only gets 12-15% of a vote and for them to get offical opposition the liberal party would have to self destruct, and many of the liberal centerist votes would go to the conservatives. Keep in mind that Green party polled higher then the NDP in the By-election, in a couple of the ridings.

He is nothing like Bush...Why is Bush always included in your arguments? The CPC would be consider left of Bush by any American. Canadian Conservatives have more policies in common with the democrats then the republicans. Sean said nothing of Canadians being affraid of a conservative majority he said that Liberals were scared to call an election. Liberal does not equal what Canadians want. I am a Canadian and I definatly want nothing of what the liberal party advocates, they do not speak for me. I like elections, I want an election as I again to have my say heard again.

I guess that all depends on what you consider to be basic service. I suspect that you and I greatly differ on this subject.