MadX

Exactly, It seems like almost everyone on here supports legalization. Think of all the tax revenue, reductions in violence, and sex for low status men, this is a win-win situation for everybody. I'm not saying brothels should be open next to schools or churches, they could be zoned to only exist in certain parts of a town or city or in rural areas. Why aren't brothels legal? This country doesn't make any sense.

Bath salts

I agree. This scandal won't kill Mulcair although I think his choice of words were very poor. Sometimes in the heat of the moment we say things we regret later. I think Mulcair will recover from this but he really should have known better. I think the NDP are more progressive than the Liberals and they would be more for the poor and the middle class. Although I would rather see Trudeau get in than Harper, I still think the NDP are the best party for the job. I wouldn't be opposed to the two parties co-operating but I'm NDP before I'm Liberal. The Liberals are more like Conservative-Lite. I think they may be a bit more progressive under Justin but I don't fully trust them.

Prostitution Law is being challenged however: http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/video.aspx?cp-documentid=cbcc2013-1306-1728-0000-239121734600

I like your style, you make sense. It seems most people seem to agree on legalization though, some just disagree with how much regulation is needed.

I understand where you are coming from but I feel if prostitution is a business it should be regulated as such. I am not suggesting that the government watch the sex acts taking place but I feel that proper medical testing for both the hookers and the johns are in order. Its a risky business and I think that we should mitigate that risk. Also if someone is selling their body they should have to pay taxes on it just like any other business. Besides if there is no regulation but legalization, it just gives the pimps impunity to brutalize their hookers.

If we fully legalized it and made sure that the prostitutes received the bulk of their earnings, we could protect sex workers, get rid of violent pimps, and help socially awkward guys get laid. The prostitutes could also be screened for diseases regularly.

Agreed, that is one of the reasons I support legalization, to make it safer. Also it will help guys who have trouble with women get laid. More people getting laid means a happier population and less crime.

I didn't know this but apparently prostitution is legal here in Canada. However most activities surrounding the practice such as procuring and the operation of brothels remain illegal. So what I am proposing is legalizing these activities that surround the practice to make it more like Nevada or Holland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_in_Canada

I was wondering if Canada should legalize, tax, and regulate prostitution like what is done in Nevada and the Netherlands. Personally, I'm totally for it. It will increase tax revenue, reduce violence against sex workers, cut down on STDs because the prostitutes will get medical attention, and guys with no social skills or athletic ability will be able to get laid. Guys like Robert Pickton wouldn't be able to as easily prey on sex workers and violent pimps would be eliminated. I can't see any arguments against legalization. It may not be the most moral thing in the world, going to a prostitute but is prostitution really much different than dating, it just usually takes place more quickly and is more honest.

I thought liberty means freedom. If one is afraid to speak out against abuse or is treated poorly for arbitrary reasons, I would consider that a curtailing of liberties. No one will have a life free of problems but why should someone have the right to create then unnecessarily?

Weed is actually less dangerous than cigarettes. Besides, there are safer ways to consume marijuana, such as using a vaporizer.

That might be true at many places Michael but not where I work. I'd say about half of the supervisors are assholes. Now out of those assholes maybe only a couple are true psychopaths but even your garden-variety asshole can still cause a lot of grief. I think many of these people are stressed out and/or have serious mental problems. I'm certain that a couple of them are actually psychopaths.

You'd be surprised, many high ranking corporate executives would fit the diagnosis of psychopathy. Take a look at this link from Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/

And alcohol isn't? Maybe we could have a law where people need to do it in their own homes or yards or at special "coffee shops", My opinion is it should be treated like alcohol. Marijuana doesn't impair one's judgement the same way alcohol does. Driving under the influence of pot is less dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. Still I wouldn't recommend anyone drive while under the influence of any drug. Marijuana is one of the safest drugs out there, have you even smoked pot before?

I like your interests, especially the last one.

I was wondering what everyone thinks of pot being legal. I think it should be, its less harmful than alcohol. Why should the government be able to tell me what I can and cannot do.

You can't appeal to the humanity of psychopaths, you give good advice but you assume that we are dealing with normal people.

Going the managers' bosses typically doesn't yield any results. The bosses' bosses typically justify abusive behaviour and covertly condone it.

I think all workplaces should be free of abuse whether unionized or not. This is an issue that transcends politics. However, I have friends who are older than I that work in unionized jobs and while they are not perfect, there tends not to be as much abuse as in the place that I work. Organizing against this type of abuse would likely be difficult as the abuse is psychological rather than physical or sexual so it would be harder to prove. Also most people are too scared to stand up for themselves. We live in an economically deprived area and most people are desperate to cling to their jobs now matter how poorly they are treated. Even though I'm not subject to most of these silly games, I still see co-workers being harrassed (not sexually but psychologically) by superiors and other co-workers. Sometimes I'll speak up if I see someone being treated obviously unfairly but typically I mind my own business and don't get involved in the affairs of others.

Well it may be possible that unions curtail liberties but I can tell you from personal experience that non-union shops do exactly the same thing. I work part time at a low paying service job (non-unionized of course). I'm currently in university and attempting to pay my way through. The job I work at has managers that treat their employees like garbage. Workplace bullying and gossip is common. Managers have their favourites, other people are singled out for scapegoating. Myself personally, I'm not treated poorly but I believe this is because of my large build and assertive personality. Also, I know that if things get bad enough I can just walk away. I'm only 21 and still live at home, my employers know that i'm in school and I only work part-time. They tend to abuse the people who are there full-time, have families, and have to be there. The more they know that you need the job, the worse they tend to treat you. It's like some sort of a power game, I think many of these managers may have been abused as children, either by their parents, their classmates, or both. They have deep seated issues. Not all of them are bad but at this job you are pretty much at the whims of your supervisor. There is no union so there is no worker protection. I'd get another job if I could but EI is hard to get, there isn't many jobs in my area, and I don't want to have to bum money from my parents, its bad enough I still live at home. Still its easier for me to leave than many co-workers. So you state that union shops deprive people of their liberty. I can tell you nonunion workplaces do the same and then some.

Even if 95,000 jobs are created, it doesn't mean Harper can take credit. As stated by a previous poster the economy is affected by factors that are outside of government control. Besides, with Harper continuing to run up our national debt, even if he does contribute to job growth, our country will eventually head into economic ruin when we can't pay our bills any longer. He's reckless, dangerous, and needs to go.

Extreme leftists? There are no mainstream parties in this country that are extreme left. The Liberals are centre to centre-right, the NDP centre-left, the Conservatives are the only extreme party in this country. Why are you calling people who don't agree with you idiot extremists. I don't think Harper is an idiot however I do feel that his agenda is radical and extreme but I base this on evidence not bias. Harper's policies have personally affected my friends and family. His cuts to EI and government workers are having a negative impact in my region. I feel that Rathgeber's decision to quit the Tory caucus was very admirable even if I don't agree with most of his views. I do agree with his bill regarding public servants however, I think the government needs to be more accountable to voters. I think that voters will support him in the next election.

I'm confused, if someone is not in a union, how can they be pressured to give their wealth to them? How do better working conditions and higher wages deprive people of their personal liberties. I think corporations do a far better job depriving people of their liberties than unions do.

I'm surprised support for the NDP is way down, I wonder what they did wrong to lose all that support.