August1991

I think that's because of the new boundaries. The card probably tells you your circonscription (riding, incidentally, is a purely Canadian term. No other parliamentary system uses it.) Impossible to disagree with you. 1. But I think Martin has planned a spring election. (These guys are competitive and ambitious. They all remember Trudeau and 1968. It bugs the hell out of them. PM PM wants this victory so bad. Redeems his father, makes him proud in his father's eyes...) 2. Harper's got it. Those are the key questions awaiting answers. Another? Layton, Martin, Duceppe, Harper in debate. I frankly think Canadian politics won't be more interesting than that - in English and French. Yeah right. Those Rosedale types and the people on Bay Street, Layton's got them in the bag. Here's the link to the old/new electoral map: Canadian Electoral Map For Ontario, separate the north from the south.

As we say in Quebec, what da 'ell? In 1867, this was not a problem because there was no Internet. Heck, there wasn't even MTV. (Think, people had to listen to music without video!) I think Macdonald lost in 1873 in his Kingston riding so, in the same election, he ran again in Manitoba - where he was safely elected. Macdonald had suppressed the Riel Rebellion and the anti-Macdonald vote had, let's say, fled the country. In the 1980s, prior to the Internet, at 8 pm sharp, the local polls closed and CBC/CTV could tell the story - usually starting here in the East with - Newfoundland has voted... Canada has, hmmm, Mountain, Central, Eastern, Atlantic, Nfld. That's 4 1/2 hours difference.

That sounds like Afghanistan to me. Honestly, I don't see the connection between democracy in Iraq and fighting terrorism. Why Iraq? Why not Syria? North Korea? Is it because we have to start somewhere and Iraq is as good a place as any? Well, then say so and move on. WMD? The Blair argument was that Iraq maybe had WMD and it will maybe pass these WMD to a terrorist group. The risk of these "maybes" was enough to justify a war against Saddam. In this scenario, who cares what government Iraq has as long as it doesn't pass WMD to terrorists. Where does democracy in Iraq fit in?

That, BD, is the whole point. And it's the point you've been missing from the very beginning. Since you'd be out of business, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE and the world would be a richer place - because we'd have the Toyota and whatever you produced too. What am I getting at? Think of typists, typewriter repairmen, secretaries, ice men, wheelwrights, filing clerks. They're out of a job. And it's good too. Now they can do something else with their time and society has what we had before, and more. (With your logic BD, we'd still be living in caves looking for fire because if we ever found a way to make fire, the firekeeper would be forced out of business, lose his job and be driven into poverty.) I don't mean to be harsh BD, but I'm beginning to believe that too many people who think like you have advised, influenced or formed the Haitian government. As a result, Haiti is filled with wheelwrights. Well, that's harsh. Anyone who knows anything about Haiti will tell you that Haiti is a strange case indeed. Graham Greene depicted it best in my view.

Stoker, why? If all that bureaucratic waste was somehow, well, eliminated, why not cut taxes instead? That's the point.

Ain't gonna happen. Don't believe me? Take the Ontario electoral map and look at the ridings. 30 NDP possibles are not there.

There used to be but it hardly affected us in the East. We'd turn on the TV to see the 32 seats of the Maritimes. (OK, and Nfld...) It was the Westerners that were outraged to turn on their TV and discover that the outcome was already decided. With the Internet, all thought of a blackout is impossible. Why don't they simply have one time-frame nationwide? In Nfld, the polls could close very late and in BC relatively early. Then there would be no question of Westerners being dissuaded from voting because of foregone conclusions. True, but all the evidence is that it will be close.

I think the Conservative idea is that by cutting all the welfare, flag, do-gooding, subsidy boondoggles, there would be enough money to increase military purchases and also to cut taxes. But that response avoids your question. Taxes could be cut even more if military purchases were not increased. The Right typically likes to protect property rights and a strong military/police does that. I'm certain that that ultimately is the US reasoning. (It goes under the name 'national security'.) In Canada, we can free ride on the US military. IMV, our own military has primarily two raisons d'être: 1) to suppress any violent dissent (FLQ, native Indians) and 2) to make English Canadians feel good by sending peacekeepers to weird places. Maybe a third: Flying helicopters to sinking ships. What's DND's budget? 13 billion or so? That's about $400 per Canadian, or a daily pack of gum.

Gotta admit, you made me laugh. (Just for the helluvit, I think it was the halibut.) I was thinking appeasement, if you catch my drift.

Cars, corn. What's the diff? Let's go further BD. Let's say Toyota comes in and GIVES THE CARS AWAY FOR FREE. Now, are you saying that I should be forced to buy your $15,000 car and refuse the free Toyota? Do you really believe economies get rich by forcing people to do such things? As to the US, you believe US taxpayers fork over money to subsidize production so that US corn can be "dumped" into Haiti. Then, when that doesn't work. The US taxpayers spend more money invading the place to force Haitians to buy the corn. It seems the US government is really determined to get those Haitians to buy those American agricultural products and they're going to spend whatever money is necessary to make it happen. I wish the Japanese would do the same for us. I wouldn't mind a cheap Lexus.

On the contrary, Ontario is impossible to call. There are about 10 or so safe NDP seats and about 10 or so safe Liberal seats. After that, it's anyone's call - split between the Liberals and the Tories. (I can't see the NDP going above 15.) The deciding factor in my view is how Ontario voters eventually decide to perceive Harper. They are looking for a safe "so-called national", alternative to the Liberals. And they haven't decided yet. BC? Well, I suspect that on election night, we in the East will know early on what the Liberal total is. But we'll go to bed very late watching how voters on the other side of the Rockies decide which party gets the most seats.

Change the word "terrorism" to "dictatorship" or to "wars" and imagine it is 1936. Now then, what would Black Dog be advocating? And what would be the consequence?

Are you saying to me that if Toyota offers to sell to you for $10,000 a new Lexus that costs 40,000$ to produce (because the Japanese government subsidizes car production), that's a bad deal for you - and of course, you would refuse? Then, if I understand your logic, the Japanese government will want to spend more money invading Canada to force you to accept this deal? You're right. The Japanese are too smart to do something as stupid as that. But the Americans, well, you know, they're awful dumb sometimes...

Fatuous? I am honestly following your logic. Can you please answer my question?

Why didn't the Americans just dump the exports in the Atlantic Ocean instead? Why the need to dump them in Haiti?

I go with the bash USA kick. After all, everyone knew that Bush's actions were just going to provoke more terrorist acts. We should all be relieved that the Canadian government didn't do as the Spanish government and go along with Bush.

ARRRGGGHHHH!!!! Bracket creep. See how it happens. Then, they run out of "other people's money". More serious. Their internal signals go all wrong, because they lose sight of reality. We have all heard about waiting lists in Canadian hospitals. How many hospitals use the Internet for their lists? How many hospital workers can answer e-mail? Why? The hospitals use 1970 technology. Why? Is this the future of Canadian Democracy? I consider myself to be a "socialist". But this is obviously ALL wrong.

G and M article Did Martin offer the same in Hamilton? Why not? When Martin says he talks to all MPs about their future, he's playing politics and he knows it. No harm there. But he's wrong to blame others. By doing so, no one will volunteer to help him in the future. "Look what Martin does to loyal Liberals."

THE Lord? I was thinking Bernard Lord. Well, you know, it's late, and well officer I was talking to some friends and... Presto, Ralphie and Mike the Knife. Hey, throw in the Rt. Hon. Brian Mulroney. You gotta point. I dunno. This Harper guy, "I canna figure", (as my Scot grandmother would say). I think about 40 or so Ontario seats are on offer because they are willing to buy a "pig in a poke". In the debate in Montreal, there was a question about gay marriage. Harper said he'd allow a free vote. I regret I didn't stand up and ask, "But how would you yourself vote, Mr. Harper?" Voters in Ontario simply want to know if this guy is honest, or a right-wing whacko. In estimating Ontario seats, and deciding the election, that's the question in my view. The rest is more or less decided. The moving pen, having writ, moves on.

What is worse? To waste a whole life doing something that one is not good at doing, or, to cause this waste in the name of something you call "equality", and that others will inevitably call unfair.

Lord? Here's a good one. Lord makes a smart move, jumps in, gets elected, goes into Cabinet at Finance. As a result, Harper's a shoo-in. Shoein? Shoe-fit? 15 years later, we're older/wiser. We're posting about how Lord became PM through a coup and how Harper has left him spoiled goods. Nah, impossible. Tories don't do stuff like that.

Details, details. I'm a "big picture" man. I once I had a "big picture" boss. I quit. Hey, don't take that seriously. Instead, go for the gusto! Give us some big numbers. (Hint: They have to add up to 308.)

Who was Craig Read and why did he (she?) start this thread? In 1970, Trudeau needed the Canadian military for something other than smug, English-Canadian peacekeeping in oogie-boogie foreign countries where people are starving/killing each other. So, my answer to Craig Read, whoever you are: No, Canada's military will not disappear. There will be enough Canadian military for smugness, and I guess to manage the possibility of the modern equivalent of 1837 insurgency, or 1970 perceived insurgency.

At first, I was rather upset that we may have frightened them off. I don't view life as a competitive game nor an argument as something to be won. In fact, I generally consider myself a "socialist" (left wing is a better description, maybe) with a tremendous respect for the role of market prices in human relations. I don't think I have ever read anything so typical of modern ignorance of Enlightenment thinking. Fortunately, in Buddhist-style, we don't need to understand how society operates to benefit from the way society operates. Laws are not like the rules of a sports match because, ultimately, if you think about it, life is not a sports match. Is it good to cheat, really? Is that what life is all about? You'd probably say no to both questions. And I'd agree with you. Now, a sports match is all about competing to win. But is it good to cheat in sports, really? Is that what sports is really all about? Well, let's admit it. Sports is often about competition. People often play to win. In fact, people sometimes cheat because they are so competitive they really want to win. Now you say, "true, that's why we must have rules in sports." I agree. And then you say, "and that's why we must have laws in society and the rule of law." Here I disagree. Very, very strongly. Why? Because life is not a sports match. Rather, life is like a sports team. It's about getting people to work together - to co-operate. Now then, how does that happen? What do you mean by the term "Public Good"? I like your idea of "self actualization that gives life purpose". What is it? I can't say for others. At most, I can talk of what it means to me, and I'm willing to assume that others seek it their own way. I suspect it has something to do with enjoying this thing called life, existence, conciousness that by chance we have. Well, here's an ethical question for you. In a shop, the clerk by mistake gives you too much change so that you have $10 extra. Should you return and tell the clerk about the mistake and give back the $10? Or should you keep the $10 and walk on. Well, the clerk made a mistake - and one possibility is that the clerk is not good at counting. (It happens in life.) If you return the money, you are just delaying the inevitable when the clerk gets fired or the business goes bankrupt. The sooner this happens the better. So, the ethical thing to do is keep the $10. (Or would it be more ethical to tell the shopowner to fire the clerk? Move the clerk to a different position? Tell the clerk to take a math course? - These are all variations on the same theme.) IMV, the ethics of Enron are no different. In other words, I think ethics should not be about justice. Ethics should be about avoiding waste. For example, should a person waste time doing something the person is not good at doing. IOW, should anyone waste this precious thing we all call "life".

Front page of the Globe: DND HP Scandal This one is truly strange. 160 million goes missing because of "confidentiality"? Who was Minister, Collenette? McCallum? Is this just bureaucratic fraud? One guy? I can imagine a debate with Martin, Harper and Layton in which all this stuff is just listed out, finger by finger. And the Liberals have the gall to run on "professional competency"? If this were a corporation, it would be ripe for takeover.