Moonbox

Interesting that you would bring up Michael Moore, because he is to the left what Anne Coulter is to the right -- a zealot cunning enough to persuade the stupid, but too dumb/unprincipled to have any integrity in the way they present the world to their viewers/listeners. They're both jokes. As for the right to free speech, I agree. People should let her say whatever she wants. Going rabid and frothing at the mouth because a crazy ***ch comes to down just makes YOU look stupid. The people causing these antics are probably the same people who believe everything Michael Moore says -- idiots. When enough of the local retard crew shows up to protest her it almost makes her look good. Give Anne Coulter the respect she deserves -- sneer in contempt, roll your eyes, laugh at her, and then forget about her. That's all she deserves.

I agree with you that it's pathetic shady, but what I find just as pathetic is that people would actually bother to go see this moron. I generally respect and agree with most of your opinions on this forum, and maybe I'm missing something here (I'll believe for my own sake you were going to see her for laughs) but the woman is so full of shit and propaganda that it's leaking out of her eyeballs. She's absolutely disgusting.

Really? I thought the usual response was to laugh and sneer at the poor-me idiots who waste their time outside with retarded signs thinking they're making a difference. I'll admit there is from time to time useful and worthwhile protests, but most of them are generally filled with the biggest losers society has to offer. Pogie moochers and going-nowheres are the norm. Even so, I'm surprised Shady would go to see Anne Coulter. She's probably the nastiest and most full-of-shit Republican I've ever heard and I'm constantly surprised how people actually take her seriously.

Yep...good 'ol Dalton. He'll weasel you every chance he gets.

Other than the 407 at least he didn't piss money into the wind. Crybaby Dalton is worse than anything we have on the federal level, Liberal or Conservative.

I'd take Harris back in a second over McGuinty.

Okay...so if all things are equal...Flaherty's projections were right according to them??? On the federal level it's a drop in the bucket. Take a look at our national debt level. Tell me if 1.5 billion is a big deal relative to that.

Having a contingency is a good idea in any budget. Unless you can compare that number to previous governments then it's meaningless.

We're talking about new hires here. They can take the job or not it's up to them. The pension plan is already grossly unfair compared to the private sector so I say go ahead with it. Let them strike. I'll survive.

Wrong. It seems some of the biggest names in economics in Canada are agreeing with him, or are even more optimistic. http://www.thestarphoenix.com/business/Economists+give+Flaherty+boost+budget+debate/2646680/story.html I'm at work and can't use the normal link function sorry. At any rate, these are just a handful of the people who DO think it's possible/likely. 1.5 billion on the federal level is peanuts, so it might as well be zero. Regardless, the target in Ontario is 3-4 years BEYOND even Flaherty's half-assed stab at the budget. Personally I'd prefer to see it gone in 2ish years max and see a cut back in program spending, but nobody is offering that option.

Who do I 'support'? Nobody really. I think they're all clowns. Some better than others. Even Flaherty is looking to mostly slay the federal deficit by 2014. Add 3-4 years to that and those are some pretty unambitious targets.

We went from a promise to not raise taxes when he took over, to new record deficits that for some reason can't be fixed for SEVEN years??? Telling us the deficit won't be taken care of for seven years is pretty much the same thing as telling us they have no intention of addressing it at all. It's pathetic.

From what I know (which isn't a lot) the wind turbines appear cost effective in the long term. Solar isn't anywhere near being cost efficient so that's another story.

It won't happen because the Liberals would kill themselves aligning with the NDP. The difference between the Liberals and CPC isn't huge and there are a lot of red conservatives that would bail the second it happened.

He asked that they keep it for him or empty it in front of him. He has a very valid point actually. How are you supposed to know airport security doesn't just take your crap and use it at home for themselves? There should be SOME accountability for the airport security, just like there would be in any other profession.

Aww Argus beat me to it. That's exactly what I was going to say. Sometimes I'm surprised the security guards at the building I'm working at aren't drooling.

The university itself is a joke. It's been censured by the CAUT (canadian university teacher's association) for issues relating to academic freedom and it's been mired in scandal for years. On top of that, it's an ethnically and politically motivated entity in the first place. Why should it receive the same funding as an actual Canadian university?

There's no agenda. I'll acknowledge that there are Bible-thumping morons who've made it quite clear what they think of things like gay rights and women's rights and there's nothing hidden about it. The 'hidden agenda' you speak of implies that the Harper cons are out to take away these rights. That's not the case and hasn't been since Harper became PM. NOT promoting all of these rights abroad doesn't equate to a hidden agenda. It just means they're not promoting them. It's a lot more simple then you're making it out to be.

This 'motion' is absolutely meaningless and I doubt will be worth the paper it was written on.

I think the question itself is kind of silly. Since currencies are always valued to international counterparts, any change in values is based on external and internal influences at the same time. If one country chooses to devalue their currency, it doesn't necessarily mean ours is worth more. In fact, demand for ours could stay the same. The only thing that has changed is the external comparison. What governments should aim for then is currency predictability. Long-term, a government can't really control exchange rates without causing other problems along with it (inflation/deflation, debt ect), thus it's more a matter of smoothing down the sharp spikes up in down in the currency value. Surprises hurt the economy, whether they be external or internal. Long term currency trends, however, can be accounted and adjusted for.

While I laugh at the 'hidden agenda' comments by some of the wing nuts here, I will say that there's a reason Harper does so poorly with the female vote. His party is out to lunch on a lot of social issues and he suffers in the polls accordingly due to this. Religion has no place in politics EVER and the sooner politicians realize this the better.

Ugh...the hidden agenda thing is so cliché and silly now. It's been what...like 4 years now? As far as I can tell we have not been secretely building the Death Star or anything like that.

Are you talking about Ontario or Manitoba or both? If Ontario, then I'm not sure how we could arrange to send back money we already sent out...Actually I like that idea. It's like a double negative. Ontario's budget - (- net equalization payments) = Ontario's budget + equalizations payments. WHERE DO WE SIGN UP FOR THIS!?!?!?

While I know virtually nothing about Manitoba or its industries, the 2 provinces you speak of left have not status the same way Alberta did. Newfoundland's waters are sitting on some sizeable oil reserves and Saskatchewan is a potash powerhouse. If not for these then they'd still be perpetual drains on Ontario's economy. That's because the balancing formula is totally borked.

You're right, but then it's also not that simple. You need only look at what happened to Alberta during the recession to see the problems with people chasing jobs across the country. Personally I can deal with equalization if the provinces used it to modernize, build infrastructure and become more competitive. The way it works right now, however, is it seems to culturalize under-achievement and inefficiency. The money should be used to improve the economy and make it so equalization isn't needed in the first place, instead of just pissing it away.