takeanumber

It's a light hearted joke. It's not policy related, so just relax. Seriously, some of you guys are as cold as....as cold as....Stephen Harper working a room.

Why don't we just wait for the actual vote count before declaring a winner instead of spamming a dozen or so seperate threads on the same topic?

My main question I suppoe would be this: The Liberal war cabinet is seeing all this...and yet they really don't seem to be adapting or adjusting to the situation. It really does have a 1993 feeling out there.

It's time to part with tradition.

Yes, but there was a massive boost from 1982-1996. Everybody I grew up with are billingual. It seems like everybody in my generation is billingual. I'm not surprised that billingualism lost some ground during the late echo period, given the quality of the french spoken by the early echo's. Alright, the strategic plan to enlarge minority communities...is it an assimilation attempt against anglos? No. I don't get why you're ranting about it. I've already stated that I believe in fairness. The Quota system is wrong. It should be based on merit. The cost of billingual programs are relatively small. I don't know the exact figure. Frankly, if it was 1 billion dollars in total cost, it would be worth it. There are so many benefits from official billingualism that can't be measured in dollars and cents. It makes Canada's workforce better too. So I'm all for it. I grew up around a lot of anti-francophone people, and anti-anglophone: outright bigots, who made statement exactly like you've made here, and then claim that they're not bigots because when Quebecois make bigoted statements, they're not called bigots. They claim they're not xenophobic because the other side is xenophobic. Then they point out how much of a victim THEY'RE made out be by being pointed out as xenophobic. Surprise: you're both guilty of xenophobic bigotry. Both anti-Anglophone Francophones and anti-Francophone Anglophones. How Guilty? As guilty as a flag drapped Liberal around a slush fund.

Swedish health care policy is incredibly complex and really non-comparable to Canada. Most European states are unitary (Baltic, Benelux, France, Portugal, Ireland, Great Britain, Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Italy) the two exceptions being Germany and Switzerland. Healthcare dynamics thus are very different beasts in those countries. Moreover, they have a different culture. Everybody chips in to help everybody out. We're also the most heavily insured country on earth. We don't like risk here in Canada and we work hard to mitigate it as much as possible. The fact is, there shouldn't be a tax on getting sick. It's really unfair. Somebody can live their entire life living great -- swimming, drinking carrot juice, avoiding red meat etc..., and still come down with catastrophic testicular cancer at 29. To suggest that that person should get inferior care to a 60 year old boomer because the boomer has the money and income to afford the best doctors and the 29 year old does not because his income has not reached that level yet, is injust. So, think about the WHOLE issue, not just from your narrow "What's best for my family is what's best for Canada" point of view.

I think most people are looking at Martin's first 6 months in office and are saying, "wow, Martin really is like Chretien, all talk no action." And you know, I can't point to a single good thing Martin has done in the past 6 months. He gave a few peanuts to the cities, but so what? And then he comes out with yet another fudgit budget that's totally wrong...how do we know? Well because he comes out with all these spending pledges during the election. It's just become so transparent and so boring, and I think ordinary Canadians might be just getting sick of it.

What pissed me off the most was that Martin imposed his choices on that riding even AFTER the media pointed it out and Canadians from coast to coast freaked. Look: Liberal's gotta understand something: If you want star candidates, then surely, if they are stars, they can stand up to a riding nomination contest. Right? We, at the local level, give all the lattitude to the PM in terms of policy in EXCHANGE FOR local lattitude at candidate selection. When the PM violates that agreement, prepare for ire. And good on the people of BC to stand up for democracy.

I think the policy you're thinking of is the "Canada Policy" launched by MacDonald back in 18xx, but I cant be sure. Yeh, a lot migrated out. Ah, there's something in our constitution called the freedom of mobility. I don't know if you heard of it or not. It's one of those rights that S. 33 can't override. To a certain extent, federal policy is kind of drowning the Quebec nation in Montreal. Anyway, can you leave this veiled hatred of Francophones behind, I think it's really offensive for you to imply that rural communities, many which have existed for 80-90 years, are assimilation outposts. I already told you that treasury board guidelines are 'sick', and the whole civil service needs to go to a merit system. This is the most liberal thing to do. The system in place now of quotas is called 'new anti-liberalism', and it's sick. Quebec has 75/300 seats. It benefits from the 1984 law just as Saskatchewan and Manitoba does. (Don't get me started on the ill-distribution of seats). They by no means 'rule' Canada. The reason why there are more billingual people in the civil service as you move down the list demographically, the reason is because younger generations are more billingual. On the whole, I agree with you on many points, but I think you start using xenophobic attacks, you lose credibility.

I support a negative income tax on economic grounds. But I have yet to find a conservative that is with me on this issue. I guess fiscal conservatism is only skin deep. Anyway, to hit this issue: Well, he should quit smoking, no doubt. But let's not forget that even peopleon welfare are people, and still have addictions that are tough to kick, especially smoking. But true, I don't like the idea of 1.17 of tax money going out to a corporation for profit and 6 bucks worth of tax comming on back to the government. When it comes to the two dogs, the Conservative answer is very clear: He should kill his two dogs and eat them. Now that's Dickens.

Not true, and I've done research on comparative health policy. As for the Boomer Express. GJ! But instead of allowing the market to decide who lives and who dies (because we must face it, all the best equipment and doctors will go to those who can afford it, leaving the poor with comparatively inferior, and thus, higher deathrates); why don't we all pitch in so that everybody gets a standard level of care. Homecare, national pharmacare -- there are so many innovative policy solutions we should be considering to deal with the 'me' generation beast. But, following the Klein Track record and applying it to Harper, the Conservatives won't give it a chance. And the Liberals have been dragging their feet for a decade. Which leaves who? lol.

That's not true. Are you aware of the flow of eastern quebeckers into the rocky mountains to work and to ski? You seem to be focused exclusively on your own generation. Those under 30 tend to be quite different WRT Canada. We grew up billingual, if not heavily broken Billingual in places (lol), but hey, it HAS paid off. And I wouldn't trade it for anything. You know -- you have the choice to learn French too.

Nothing short of a complete purge of the Liberal party is needed. Martin and company can be summed up by one word: tainted.

You might want an English Canada and a French Canada. I want a Canada. There's a fundamental difference. If it costs extra, so be it. At least a francophone from Quebec can go on vacation in Kelowna and still mail a letter. What do you have against French tourists or French in general?

1. Privatising vast swaths of Health Care. 2. Tax reductions so you can afford to pay for privatised health care. 3. Military spending: bullshit. I'll believe it when I see it. 4. Provincial rights: decentralization. Is it good? Do most people understand s.92? 5. Government accountability and trust: how? Once they're elected, there's no recall. There's no PR. There's nothing in their platform with respect to transparency. Are the Federal Conservatives going to act like the Alberta Conservatives? Are we going to get plagerists and bullies like we do provincially. Sorry. I've had enough of Conservative pork, corruption, greed, arrogance and lies from living in Alberta for over a decade. If the Federal Conservatives are offering what's on the menu in Alberta, I'll have to pass.

There was malicious intent. An intent to get moderates to support the war. How is talking about uranium cake when they knew full well that the intelligence was faulty, NOT LYING. Seriously. Iraq is not Germany. There are important differences. For instance, Germany is largely one nation (remember--the whole 'Nazi' phase that no Germans seem to know anything about, or what's the latest excuse now? Oh, "It vas all Hitler, I vew nothing.") Iraq is three nations. So-- the situations arn't analogous. Maybe it's best to let them decide how to run their country and their lives. If they make the wrong choice and choose theocracy and support of terrorism, let France/Germany go in next time.

Amen. The Fraser Institute often has a hard time getting money from corporations because of it's anti-pork stance. The corporations like the pork. I don't get why if I get laid off, and collect EI, I'm a bum, but if a corporation gets a constant stream of pork, they're somehow terrific. Moreover, EI is running a surplus because Martin has made it so freaking difficult for people to claim it when they really need. it. (And don't get me started about the effects of EI in the Maritimes) But yeh, wait till the next recession and see how well the 905 fares when they realize they can't get EI because of the massive restrictions. Then we'll be treated to a lecture about 'their money'.

Ahem. there are rural communities in Alberta, Ontario and B.C. that have a high percentage of francophones. What the hell do you have agaist francophone farmers, huh? As for your Treasury Board statistics, I don't think they're that lopsided. I've seen the quotas for different regions, and frankly, they're sick. It should always be based on merit, not on language. However, Reid was making comments to the Times and Transcript, and was making Jonesist comments, which actually stoked up some old, bad memories, and bolstered the accurate perception that the old COR core, which used to be Reform nucleus in New Brunswick, has in fact implanted itself into the new Conservative party successfully, and that the culture of intolerance is indeed still alive in the Conservative party. I don't think all conservatives are bad people, I just think so many conservatives refuse to look past their city block and think of what's right for society. Billingualism might be expensive, but it's what's best, especially for New Brunswick. Those are true dynamics as to what was going on.

With all due respect, you have NO idea how pure the elite Conservative agenda is. It's enough to make free market liberals like myself wince even. Now, I found this comment funny: First off, honesty, good government, ethics and accountability are NOT in fact hidden agendas. (good rhetoric though.) Instead of Liberal lackeys, it's gunna be conservative lackeys. (The PM has tons of pork and patronage to laddle out, and don't think that because the Tories have been cut out for so long, that they're going to go without! Hell no, just as with the Pensions, the tories are going to say, "meeeee tooooo". On the second point, of finding out where the taxes are actually going, read Savoie, 2001. It's not and excuse as to why things are being run the way they are, but it gives good insight into the complexitities, and the consequences, of Conservative attempts to run government like a business. I cut up my Liberal party card three years ago when I just couldn't stomach the arrogance and the corruption any longer. (Plus, political membership means absolutely jack shit in this country.) So, don't confuse me for a partisan. But all of this Conservative and NDP bandwagon 'oh they're so much better' bull is just that. Bull. Return a minority.

Maybe it was a little bit too nuanced for you, here goes: Alright, here we go. The complaints from the right wing always centre against the Unions, in that they're making unreasonable demand ALL the time. Yet, what I was stating is that often, governments are unreasonable too in their demands. Make sense?

No, but close enough. Harper is a lot like Martin though, only Harper is slightly worse at hidding his hidden agenda. With Martin, there's a cute little thing called a track record. And the attacking of somebody's patriotism is the most Republican thing I've heard in Canada. Anyway, side rant there. I think this election is more like 1958; but you never know, the slide might turn around, and fast, if some of the more nasty plans that Harper has are revealed. And there IS a hidden agenda. Don't dillude yourself. It's an agenda that I don't think the 905 would be able to handle.

I was lied to about the WMD. Thankfully, my main reason for supporting the war was on the grounds of human rights. The US should have left a long time ago and allowed Iraqi's to decide their own fate. It sounds aweful, but national self-determination is the most liberal course of action. (PS. To the new-Anti-Liberals who opposed the war because Iraq was already contained, SHAME ON YOU, so many dead iraqi children from the sanctions, and most of you wanted the sanctions to continue in lieu of war. To the old-Anti-Liberals who shifted their logic from WMD to human rights midway through, SHAME ON YOU, you're not fooling anybody by being irridentalist one day and switching when it suits you. The only people you're fooling are yourselves.)

This isn't the 2000 election. There's no guarantee that Lib Support will continue to slip. I think the debate this year will matter, and I think there are tons more closetted Harper people who are going to start showing cracks. You can only hide your agenda for so long.

Free Market= Where supply is allowed to equal demand. Things that interfere with the Free Market (in some cases): Tax Wedges. Quotas Tariffs Price Ceilings Price Floors Thx for trying out though. You're right. I feel terrible. You know, I cry myself to sleep every night thinking about you. You won't be able to buy that second wine cellar, or take a third trip to wine country, or, *gasp*, be able to smuggle another million dollars into your offshore trust. Sorry, I'm just tearing up. Listen: pay your fair share of taxes. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be rich. I'm saying that if you ARE rich, give other Canadians a chance to climb the social ladder too. That means paying TAXES so that kids in bad neighborhoods can go to good schools to. It means actually considering the welfare of the whole society, and not your own little block association in Cedarbrae. My MY--where is the REAL AF that I know? Oh, there you are. (You almost convinced me that you weren't ignorant for a second. Whew. That was close. I was almost forced to start taking your comments as being informed!).

It's still early.