Cartman

That is exactly the message that was sent. Make sure you look accountable and sincere, but behave arrogantly and keep stealin alive!

All this does is reinforce JW's point that they are not penalizing this stuff even though hooking and pulling still exists. That is the problem.

Many people are unhappy with NHL hockey because of this stuff but the league is just not responding with what people really want. Market failure. If I were a neo-liberal, I would point out that the Flames made $$ this year with a relatively low team salary and even though the Oilers did not even make the playoffs, they still made $$ too. This is a problem with poor decision making amongst management. After all, they are the ones making the decisions in terms of whether to pay high salaries or not. If the owners cannot make $$ in a free market where they can offer a high contract or let the player go try elsewhere, then too bad so sad. Rather than blame the players, they might want to ask why the next owner is willing to pay out too much $$ for the player. If Costco goes under because they pay too much $$ relative to WalMart then too bad. If I were a neo-liberal, I would also ask why someone like Iginla should be forced to take less than what he could get in a free market when he is one of the best players in the league. A salary cap violates free market principles and sounds like communism to me. He worked hard his whole life to raise his talent levels and now the owners want to restrict his salary potential? The Flames don't have to pay him that much and he is free to look elsewhere including other leagues if he wishes. Maybe nobody will want him. Perhaps European hockey will make its way to the airways. It is a cleaner game anyways and they are starting to pay high salaries and attract good talent. I wonder what the owners will do?

Sadly, you are right, it is a rip off. Either make the system effective or eliminate it. As it is right now, it offers little value but costs much.

Wow...well done. I would love to be a fly on the wall when these three meet. I remember when a few premiers formed a similar alliance against Trudeau. Didn't work well.

There is nothing more noble than defending one's nation, but I do not think that Iraq qualifies as this is an aggressive war (not defensive). IMO, Afghanistan may be considered a defensive war. I suspect that many of these people entered the army because it was one of the only ways to earn and living and obtain an education. Call that a choice if you like. Bush showed no interest in serving his nation in a foreign war.

I thought that it was illegal to tax a tax. I suppose I am wrong because it happens, but was this not illegal at one point in time? Does anyone know for sure?

I thought that my last sentence made it clear that I was not serious. I do not endorse a 100% estate tax, I endorse a small sliding estate tax with a high threshold. I sincerely apologize for my dry humour.

I agree with August ( ) when he said that Michael offered some good explanations. It was inappropriate for Campbell to become leader that early in her career and she had little time to organize an effective campaign. The PC's were burnt out in general. I think there was a little bit of sexism in the media too because they spent too much time analyzing her earings (apparently she rarely changed them). What was rather strange was how she had been a pretty articulate person who imploded once she took the leadership i.e. She claimed it was fatigue.

PFF did you previously work for Arthur Anderson? Perhaps all surplus wealth should be appropriated by the state. That way people would spend all their money while they are alive thereby contributing greatly to the economy. We could also lower taxes for alive people. As well, rich kids would not sit on their asses for the better part of their lives waiting to earn money the old fashioned way (inheriting it). And finally, it would also ensure that everyone starts life with the exact same opportunities. This would force people to truly compete based on their abilities and actions. Perhaps this tax should slide rather than be flat or alternatively raise the threshold a little.

Well Hugo, the utopia you speak of sounds a lot like Marx's vision of communism ("whithering away of the state"). I would like to believe people could exist without a state but I highly doubt it will happen anytime soon. Look at what happens around the world when state authority is eliminated. There usually exists high rates of murder, genocide, rape, looting etc. You mention one historical anomaly that did not last and neglect to point out that people could be whimsically labeled as witches and executed in the US until the late 1600's and early 1700's. I would rather live with a state that prevents me from listening to a radio station that was well warned about making racist comments than live in chaos. Anarchy = chaos.

Liberal health care policy = let's watch the health care system deteriorate, but accumulate a huge surplus.

Anyone else think this is a viable idea?

You have a point. It is kind of scary when these protests take place and elected leaders do not even acknowledge them. The UBC incident comes to mind. They had written permission to demonstrate in front of the leaders, only to be told at the last minute that this was rescinded by those without juristiction. There must be a place for people to efffectively express their discontent on government (other than here ).

I see your point, but on the other hand, many people do not act in their own self-interests and require "leadership". That is, many people prefer to drink and smoke, eat too much, spend their money on luxuries and engage in crime. This does not sound very pallatable but is it not the reality? If we had no authority over us, would we not exist in a state of upheaval and unrest rather than relative wealth and order?

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

I have noticed from several posts that many people have very negative perceptions of politicians in general. I have known several politicians and they have all been quite reasonable, hard working and thoughtful people who deserve our respect. I have even approached politicians from the opposite end of the spectrum and believe they took my concerns seriously. Does anyone have positive feelings on politicians? Are we too quick to stereotype because of a few "bad apples"?

IMO, the problem is that any opposition party, regardless of whether they are left or right, are unable to provide strong opposition to government policies because Albertans like to vote in an homogenous fashion. We have had few governments since Alberta was even created! I believe this to be the case because there is the perception that a united front to the ROC is needed; dissent is simply bad for Alberta's interests. An image change for the NDP will not work even if they moved way to the right. In order to topple any ruling party, an opposition must do it very quickly and with the strong economy, this is not gonna happen anytime soon. We should just take a poll rather than spend the $$ on an election.

I have read this analogy before but not quite in this context (C. Tilly?). The difference between the mafia and the state is that citizens have no effect upon the mafia as they cannot vote people in or out (even bureaucrats to a lesser extent indirectly). Perhaps the state does not act at the behest of citizens, but it does often act on behalf of the electorate and it is subject to some restraints. If some on the left are considered conspiracy theorists when they claim that corporations often act against the common good because of short-term greed, then I believe it is fair to say that some on the right can also be labeled as such for considering the state to be a big conspiracy acting against the common good.

I believe Caesar has a strong point. If we never try to build some of our own hardware, then we will never generate a domestic industry and will always be dependent upon others. If we lose $$ in the short term, I suspect that it will be recaptured in the long run. At some point in time, we need to start helping ourselves rather than letting the UK and the US do it for us.

You beat me to the punch MS. I think that this is a great idea but I wonder if it will fly. I would really like to see how the other two react (if they react at all) considering that they both seem to be in hiding.

Point taken, we should be more precise and fair. I make such statements at times and will try to be more precise from now on.

I find it rather frustrating that we essentially have a one party system in Alberta. The opposition of any stripe (right or left) is so weak that it is fair to call it non-existent. Albertans are too conformist and rather cynically, I wonder why we even bother to spend the money on elections when the outcome is of absolutely no surprise. Would it not be beneficial to have some diversity here even if you believe Klein has done a great job?

Agreed MS. It is about time to act on this one.

Canadians seem to want an old left solution to environmental problems because the market has not responded to their wishes. Check out this Environics poll http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs...cs-poll-eng.pdf