Jump to content
A Note on Topic Titles – Be Clear & Descriptive!

ReeferMadness

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,953

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ReeferMadness

  1. ReeferMadness
    Wow. This guy is really full of himself. I'm not sure whether to respond to his views on human reproduction (which can best be described as Nazi-inspired), his deeply flawed views of technological advancement or his ridiculous views on people. Suffice it to say, if the world were always dominated by simpletons like him, we'd still be fighting tigers with stone weapons.
  2. ReeferMadness
    That would be kind of redundant. They already have a Christian evangelist as Prime Minister. And when you equate Christian evangelism with a document that summarizes work produced by 60 scholars, you are clearly identifying yourself as anti-science. Which would hardly be news to anyone reading your ridiculous posts on climate change.
  3. ReeferMadness
    After watching a CPC candidate pee in a mug, I'd be careful about drinking the CPC kool-aid.
  4. ReeferMadness
    The connection was manufactured by the media to drum up some interest in the story.
  5. ReeferMadness
    I don't even begin to understand how any of the old guard could be happy with where the NDP has landed. They could have achieved more progressive policies if they were a third place party with a more progressive leader. If you have to abandon most of your principles to gain power, then what's the point?
  6. ReeferMadness
    You hang around a Canadian discussion site finding gratification every time anything American is mentioned. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one around here who feels sorry for you.
  7. ReeferMadness
    First, the manifesto has nothing to do with the NDP. They describe themselves as non-partisan and having supporters from different parties. Second, if the NDP feels it is being outflanked on the left, they have nobody but themselves to blame. What exactly is the point of having 2 parties trying to occupy the same centre ground? Particularly, when they know that the broken voting system will just hand victory to the party that stands alone in the right?
  8. ReeferMadness
    I don't mean the glossy marketing speak. I mean the supporting material. Naomi Klein, et al are just presenting material. They didn't make it up.
  9. ReeferMadness
    Did you read it? Or are you just relying on what has trickled through on this site?
  10. ReeferMadness
    Broken voting system.
  11. ReeferMadness
    So a team of experts has gone out and studied an issue of great importance. Rather than give their findings to politicians, they've presented them directly to the public. That's called democracy. If you don't recognize it, that's because we see so little of it in this country. How do I feel? I'm elated that we have so many brilliant, creative caring people in Canada who would take that time to do that. At the same time, I'm disappointed that the media are so desperate for a narrative that they've spun this as an attack on the NDP. And I'm really disappointed that people are so distrustful of scientists they will write the manifesto off without even studying it. Clearly, the people who put their time into this document feel that the half measures that we will get out of the NDP/Liberals (they might as well be one party TBO) aren't going to be enough to forestall some serious consequences. Climate change deniers are like anti-vaxxers, but much more dangerous because there are many more of them. Most people seem to be in this state of denial. They won't actually argue that the science is wrong but they aren't willing to actually do anything about it either. Finally, I think Mulcair is exactly how he presents himself - a middle of the road politician. He's Canada's Tony Blair (without the charm). Unlike Harper, who is a lunatic right winger who's held himself back because he knew Canada would only stand for so much, Mulcair will hold back his left wing because he fundamentally doesn't agree with them. He might throw them the odd bone (like a few percent raise in corporate tax) but if anyone is looking for Mulcair to save us from climate change, they're going to be sadly disappointed.
  12. ReeferMadness
    So, I take it you're from the Kim Campbell school of thought - elections are no time to discuss issues? And you think that it's good for Canada for the NDP to be have policies that are virtually identical to the Liberals? And clearly, you believe that politics should be a team effort. If you're not on the Harper team, then you must be on the Mulcair team.
  13. ReeferMadness
    So. Either your hero Harper is spending government resources and putting a chill on legitimate dissent by passing unconstitutional legislation OR you're talking out your arse. Most likely both. You're right. Harper has made a practise of wasting money passing laws he know will be struck down. He understands that his base, comprised of largely poorly educated and unintelligent followers, will be energized when the SCC strikes down his ridiculous laws. Then the Conservative fundraisers can indignantly point to "judicial activism" and the cheques will pour in so Sir Harper can strike down all those leftists in the courts. He also knows that many people in BC_chick's position will self censor rather than risk being deported - even if the risk is small. So, even as you and others like you admit he abuses his power, you'll support him anyway because you think he puts a few extra tax dollars in your pocket. Spend your 30 pieces of silver wisely.
  14. ReeferMadness
    Do you even know what the reference to a tinfoil hat means? Maybe you should research it.
  15. ReeferMadness
    In your view it's responsible. In my view (and that's shared by others here) it's unnecessary and counter-productive. My point that it has nothing to do with the title of this thread.
  16. ReeferMadness
    You've been pretty clear that you don't like things to change - ever. Do you yell at your kids if the TV remote has been moved 1/2 inch from it's "spot"?
  17. ReeferMadness
    We always find new things to do. History repeats itself. Until it doesn't.
  18. ReeferMadness
    Because by 2025, as many as half the current jobs won't exist. We keep trying to apply yesterday's solutions to tomorrow's problems. Sooner or later, we need to come to the point where we recognize that a lot of so-called work is just shuffling money around and we don't need as many people to do it. Banking, retail sales, corporate law, tax accounting - there are huge swaths of people that produce nothing and exist really as a mechanism to redistribute money. We hardly manufacture anything in this country anymore and we're still all working. The question is what are we doing? The answer is that we're creating an ever-expanding range of goods and services but people can only consume so much. If you look at the trends - an aging workforce, automation that is on the verge of eliminating all kinds of jobs, overpopulation and environmental degradation which is slowly raising awareness that we need to set some limits on many of our activities, they all point in one direction. Sooner or later, we need to rationalize and come to the conclusion that a system devoted to an ever-expanding GDP is neither possible nor desirable.
  19. ReeferMadness
    I think anyone who advocates radical depopulation should be willing to be at the front of the line for any schemes that come out of that goal. The idea that there is a "right" number of people that the planet can support is just plain wrong. Given the right technology and people with the right attitudes, the planet could easily support 10 billion people. On the flip side, if greed and selfishness continue to be the guiding ethos, it won't matter what population we have - eventually we will screw things up.
  20. ReeferMadness
    Allow me to reframe the debate. The change the Conservatives made to OAS is misguided and unnecessary; but it is tangential to this discussion. It's dumb policy but not corrupt. I think you should just leave it out of this discussion - it's irrelevant to your main point. What you really mean to discuss is the way that the parties have corrupted the political landscape. And if you're talking about the last 10 years, then yes, it's really about the Conservatives.
  21. ReeferMadness
    I don't understand this thread. Do you want to discuss the pension issue and the economic sustainment of Canada within the context of overpopulation and environmental containment issues like climate change? Or do you want to discuss the political environment, how the Harperites have distorted and realigned the political landscape for their own benefit, and how to fix it (as the thread title suggests)? If you try to mix them both, you have such a broad thread that anything might be relevant.
  22. ReeferMadness
    Sure. Let's all just give up. Everyone's corrupt and out system is as good as it can ever be. It's funny. Nobody who's met me in real life has accused me of being naive. No matter, though. I'd much rather be naive and optimistic than cynical and pessimistic. Or, in the words of another idealist: You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope one day you'll join us... Everyone is corruptible but not everyone is corrupt. Good systems encourage good behavior and reveal bad behavior. Weak systems allow the rot to hide and spread unseen. We have a weak system.
  23. ReeferMadness
    You just don't believe anything can ever be made better. If our system sucks, that's OK because all the other systems suck worse. If our government is corrupt, that's OK because all of the other governments are corrupt too. How do you go on?
  24. ReeferMadness
    Harper is corrupt? Obviously, that's Chretien's fault!!
  25. ReeferMadness
    How would you know? Every time our PM lies to us about how our system works, she doesn't bother to correct him. Maybe the queen should be replaced by a panel of university professors. At least they have the guts to speak up. Define "works". toadbrothers standard of excellent governance is when a leader steps down without actually being shot first. Is that your bar as well? Why write anything down? Whatever Harper says goes. We can't change the senate because the country is divided. And part of the reason the country is divided is that we have a voting system that rewards leaders who use wedge issues to divide people. And I am so thankful that we have a Charter of Rights that has prevented and reversed some truly regressive legislation. You should be too. You keep saying it works well. When the PM lies to the country about how the system works and apparently this is no cause for scandal or alarm, is that your definition of working well? The Queen and GG are figureheads who can't exercise any real power without undermining their own positions. Is that another way it works well? The PM appoints everyone (including the GG who later decides the outcome of elections), controls all the legislation and dictates to the senate. Is that working well too? I pointed out to you a number of important differences on another thread. You just ignored them and told me you read a bunch of books. This is not evidence.
×
×
  • Create New...