Moonbox

If the amount of posts is indicative of how scared you are of an election, you must be TERRIFIED GWIZ. You've posted over 1400 times in less than 2 months. You're averaging 27 posts a day. You seem to be fussing, thrashing and wetting your pants over the idea! LoL! Nice thread topic! Keep it up you're making yourself look smrt!

Riiiight. Canada's going to lead the way in that fight....

Aecon is one of Canada's biggest construction/development firms. It would make even less sense if they DIDN'T receive a lot of the stimulus funds. Your conspiracy theories would have more traction at rabble I think.

Oh I see. The classic "I know you are but what am I?" argument. Let me adjust my tactics in this thread to reflect the grade 3 mentality you're using here. You have cooties.

I can't remember where I said that. Are you making things up again, like you do for all of your arguments?

With jokes like that, I'm not sure you could fill a bathroom stall. Keep your day job...if you have on.

You second that emotion? Oh man you're priceless.....

Again, your numbers are complete bulls***. Show us the numbers GWiz. That's where you really seem to flop.

What does that have to do with ANYTHING? My post was about dollars and budgets and PMs' records in respect to that, and you come back with an outdated 20+ year old essay written by a trade protectionist?? What the hell?? You might as well have posted a link to a Hanna Montana website. Not only was it completely unrelated to my post or really the thread in general, it was also a totally balogna essay and has almost been entirely proven WRONG on all counts. Go back to my post and the numbers etc I went over and counter that or admit you can't please. I'd appreciate it.

I agree with that, but Chretien and Martin axed expenses (granted a lot of it was dumped on the provinces) but it can be done if you stick to your guns.

LoL. You might want to check the "state of affairs" Trudeau left Canada in after 1984. Canada's debt level was around 9% of GDP in 1968. By 1984, when Turdeau finally bailed, he'd turned our debt level to 40% of our GDP. He did that in about 9 years. Not only did he grow our debt level (relative to the size of our economy) faster and more than any PM in history, he also did it at a time when interest rates were higher than ever. The Bank of Canada rate in 1984 was something retarded like 14% (right now it's 1%). The cost of simply SERVICING Pierre Trudeau's debt was about 5.0% of GDP when Mulroney took over. To put that in perspective for you, 5% of GDP today would be about 66 billion dollars. The cost of simply keeping up interest payments on Trudeau's debt when Mulroney took over was the equivalent today of 66 BILLION dollars each year. That's even more than Harper spent on stimulus at the recession's worst. Another interesting fact is that if not for Pierre's debt repayment, Mulroney would have ran operating surpluses from about 1986 on. He spent less on federal programs than he collected in taxes, but about 5% of his GDP was being spent on interest payments thanks to the debt Trudeau saddled on him. I'll agree with you that Mulroney was a bad PM, because he should have recognized the mess Trudeau put us in sooner and he didn't, but GWiz you need to get a freaking clue when it comes to numbers. You don't have a clue. Here's some reference material which I'm sure you'll ignore/not understand: http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2007/03/a_brief_history.html

No I think your numbers are based on NOTHING. Run them by us please. Mulroney was a terrible PM, but he inherited a Canada in shambles from the worst fiscal manager Canada's ever seen in Pierre Trudeau. Chretien and Martin ran the country through the most prosperous 14 years Canada's seen since the 1950's. They had to be idiots to screw things up then. I'll give them credit for not blowing their load on and actually paying down Canada's debt, but they certainly didn't do anything special. I'm not terribly thrilled with it considering THEY felt they had to import Ignatieff to do the job. I shudder at the thought of Turdeau II getting a shot at things. I'm not thrilled with him either, but I'm used to PM's being not doing what I want. At least I know what Harper's planning and he's likely to follow through with it. Ignatieff and the Liberals have been so shifty and mercurial over the last 5 years that I can't trust him even BEFORE he forms a government. Personally I think the long form census is a joke and it didn't bother me at all. I'm wary of the F-35 and don't really like the plane much, but I'm not army and I don't see much out there that would do the job a whole lot better.

They do. Do you think something like a hospital would have a backup diesel generator, but a nuclear power plant wouldn't? You don't have a clue. They had backup generators in Japan, it's just a tsunami and a 9.0 earthquake sometimes cause problems. The best and most expensive fusion reactors in the world have managed to output something stupid like 1.000000001 x more energy than it has cost to contain the reaction, and it cost BILLIONS and BILLIONS to build. We're 20-30 years MINIMUM from even pioneering commercial use.

Lol Lindsey Lohan. That was funny. You're totally right about Chernobyl though. The Soviet Union was probably the most environmentally disastrous regime to ever exist on Earth. Their environmental and safety standards were atrocious and their Chernobyl design and the safety standards within were pathetic.

So if he opened the contract to competition he'd get the replacement fighter for free? Or at least 60% cheaper? You're not very good with numbers are you??? No I'm pretty much with you on that and I'm certainly against the tax cuts. Nope. I think Harper is a bad fiscal manager and socially he's a bible-thumping wing-nut. My problem is that I trust him more than Ignatieff. I tuned Ignatieff out completely when, after the cons already opened the floodgates and committed tens of billions in stimulus, he wanted them to spend more. Harper's the evil I know. Ignatieff's given me about a dozen different reasons to fear him even more.

Because it provides enormous amounts of clean energy. The waste is stored safely and the radioactivity doesn't leak out.

A lot of markets in the US make tons of money...just not so much the ones where there are palm trees outside. Shortl list of NHL franchises set to fail: Atlanta Phoenix Carolina Florida Nashville Islanders There are two or three markets in Canada that would happily take some of those on. Winnepeg Hamilton Quebec It's going to happen it's just a matter of time.

Yeah I think you've made it pretty clear you've voted one way your entire life. You're about as far from the fence as anyone on this forum and you haven't moved in ages. Head in the sand is a better description than 'walking along the fence'.

If it was up to Ignatieff he would have spent even more. I seem to recall him flipping out and carrying on that Harper wasn't spending ENOUGH during the recession. It's interesting how you and he forget that after the fact...

An appeals process would, in effect, do the same thing as allowing the parents to have their own way. It would take months and months all at the taxpayer's expense. The taxpayer's generosity knows limits. One of those is throwing money away at a hopeless cause. In Bible Land it seems taxpayer's generosity ends more or less as soon as you walk into the hospital.

Sure. We should always have a full accounting of these sorts of things. I would hope that it's being done. As for why do I think it's more expensive, that could be for a number of reasons. You could be getting better/more effective servicing. The nature of the jobs themselves could be completely different. A huge part of it is probably the way accounting is done. When we say a private sector contractor does the work more expensively, is that comparing the wages and the profits they take merely to what you would pay public sector employees as a wage, or are you comparing it their long term costs? The effective salary of a public sector employee skyrockets once you include their benefits and pension plans.

Using CAPITALS and BOLDING does not really make your argument any STRONGER. Outsourcing government contracts to PRIVATE companies is FINE if you are actually paying for SERVICES at a decent BUCK. That's no different than paying public sector employees to do the SAME thing. Adscam provided no SERVICES and WAS nothing but FRAUD I'm sorry you can't see the difference...for your sake and for your poor childrens'.

I agree with this in principle. If the parents have the money and means to prolong the child's life, that's completely their business. If it's money out of someone else's wallet, however, like the public purse or an insurance company, throwing money at a worthless cause serves nothing but the parents' grief and somewhere the line has to be drawn. Ontario doctors drew the line here and they had every right to do so. An American health insurance company would have done the same.

Prove to us that the money is being spent on little to no service and then you can say it's exactly the same. Adscam was a total fraud of taxpayer's dollars where money was given away for pretty much NOTHING to Liberal cronies. The fact that you can equate outsourcing to Adscam is scary...scary in how dumb the idea is.

I didn't even read your update. Other than the article in the news and the last page or so, I've read next to nothing on the topic. You're baiting people. You're trolling. I'm not whining about it. A lot of the time it's pretty funny. Keep it up for all you like.