Cartman

Thanx for the link, it was quite informative! Under this system, I would pay $156.00 less per year so not a huge decrease. It is very funny that the system I was suggesting/describing sounds a lot like this one. I think they have done a great job here though I believe that they lied to Ontario voters before implementing it. If I am not mistaken, they said they would never do such a thing?

Let us assume that you are correct. What are we going to do should poverty rates become so high that it is clearly having a serious negative affect on society? Depending on how you measure poverty, as many as 1/5 Canadian children grow up in relatively poor homes. They are known to have poorer health (costly to the health care system), be more likely to engage in crime (costly for policing in terms of $$ and danger to people), be less educated because they perform poorer in school (costly in terms of retraining and other social programs etc).

What are the rates in Ontario?

I AM CANADIAN!! http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...sing040823.html

I do not think it is just the taxation b/c in southeastern BC they are 75 cents/litre (74.9).

I used this example because I also believe it shows the effects of supply and demand. We should also keep in mind though that wages are high in part because there are few people from the third world competing for them here (because immigration restrictions reduce competition and are in a way protectionist). I was kind of hoping you might respond to whether it is rational though. Sometimes markets crash. Also, should the market dictate that "riggers" earn the same wages as nurses or social workers? Pop stars earn so much more than doctors etc etc. (you have heard this b4)?

I am familiar with the case, but like so many events it seems as though there never was a real conclusion. I think that people lost all interest once the stocks crashed completely. I just found it interesting how the media reported that he just "fell out of a helicopter". I mean it was devoid of any context. They made it sound as though he should have been wearing better shoes or something. Every time I read yet another instance of corporate wrongdoing and lax government regulation, I want to pull out more $$ from the market (gov't bonds have treated me well). I just managed to avoid both the Nortel and Tyco messes (pulled out in time after being significantly involved in both companies). I worry though, if at some point in the future, I am going to get burned big time. How do you know that your next few investments will not go the way of Bre-X? You do not.

76 cents here

Wow...I truly commend you on your honesty. I personally think that neo-liberal politicians should be so honest...really. I would like to know what would actually happen if a provincial government were to implement such a scheme (try it in Ontario first). Might you not have really crappy employees? If fast food restraurants were to pay say $2.50/hour (or whatever the market "demands"), would it not be difficult to get good employees? Would many teens just avoid employment and thus raise wage levels because of reduced labour supply? How do we know that the market would always demand lower wages? In the oilfields in Alberta, non-union people with virtually no skills (as we commonly think of them) can easily earn $7-8000 per month with much time off. This seems rather high to me.

August This sounds like a pretty consistent explanation me August (below). Is Hugo not correct in asserting what the right should be seeking if they want to be consistent? Hugo August Though I entirely disagree with the conclusions made, I understand Hugo's perspective. I do not understand your position on the matter August. Seems to me that this is a pretty valuable public service.

I am not sure whether this is the right place to post this link. Anyone know some background to the story? Seems odd both left at the same time. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...agna040820.html

A "majority" is 50% and over. Perhaps a "clear majority" is 60-65%?

Either way I pay so I would rather it be done on my income tax. In a way, the PC's in Alberta do this when it comes to provincial sales tax. By that I mean that needed gov't revenues come from incomes rather than on the use of services/products. I think they have been very intelligent to do it that way. I also like their idea to have a statement of costs go to everyone but perhaps this has been too expensive to implement. Hopefully, they will some day be able to do this automatically via computers and email.

I think you are right and the Lib. gov't is probably quite excited about the short-term benefits of selling it off when prices are high. I have no problem with private corporations being heavily involved in energy, but I become a little nervous about having no government presence when it is such a vital/essential service. Having said that, I think we need to determine what is a public service and how gov'ts should be involved in them.

I don't think (I could be wrong here) that the price is too hefty considering how small the fee is and how vital is the service. The PC government has said many times that they would never allow an Albertan to be refused service due to an inability to pay premiums. They have also said that they have never come across such a situation. Maybe many will believe that I am naiive here, but I actually believe them. Personal experiential knowledge tells me that they are far more flexible on this matter than in BC. It would sure be nice if it could be paid once a year on our income taxes. It seems redundant and expensive to pay for health care in several ways rather than in one centralized fashion. In order to collect the $$$, they have to set up another gov't department which then needs to take some of this $$ in order to exist. Having said this, premiums do not really affect me personally because my employer pays it and that is not uncommon for many people.

I am against selling off this corporation. If I am not mistaken, Trudeau wanted the government to have a presence in the market to know what was actually happening and to have a measure of influence if needed. The government should retain a majority of the shares.

Given the average salary in Alberta, this is quite small (for most people). I realize that this might be a lot for some folks working minimum wage. Subsidies are also available, but the threshold is quite low. I think that the problem with premiums is that you pay all of this tax money to begin with, and then you still have to pay a premium and then there is talk of a user-fee? Why not just have it part of the tax system to begin with? A premium also does not "slide" based on income. For most families $1056.00 per year is not that much, but for some it is high and it is not fair that a person making say 100G a year pays the same as someone who makes say 20G's per year. For the most part, though, they anger me because they are inconvenient. I say, just charge people when they do their income taxes once a year. That seems to be more efficient, convenient and economical wouldn't you agree?

You might have added that he also flip flopped to some extent when he later said all levels of government were responsible for these deaths. I think he made this statement because he got media coverage and if I am not mistaken, it worked. His support was highest right after this comment. One way or another, Canadians will have to deal with poverty as it affects everyone in several ways. They are not just going to go away even if we do our best to ignore them.

In Alberta, single coverage is $44/month while families pay $88/month.

I am not sure about this one. Even though the next election is far away, I predict another Liberal government unless the NDP manages to take away some of their vote. I really do not see much of a difference between the current Liberals and Conservatives anyways, so I don't really care which one gets elected though I am partial to the colour blue.

I am surprised this guy is still alive. I would not be surprised, however, if he met with some unfortunate "accident" at any time. On the other hand, Castro is still alive somehow.

True enough BBM. Just couldn't resist. Sorry.

A good politician does not have to flipflop because s/he clearly offers Cdns an agenda that they can accept or reject. This is what made Douglas a great premier. As well, I think that Trudeau was very arrogant, but I also think he stood up for what he believed and never relinquished. You cannot lead by polls; "dogs know what to do with polls". At the end of the day, people will make their own judgements good and bad. Imagine, if you will, it is discovered that nuclear weapons are found in Iraq and that they had concrete plans to use them on Israel. I realize that this is highly unlikely. In this case, Harper's original suggestions would be proven correct. It shows more character to admit a mistake than to hide it. He underestimated Cnds. when he did this. I believe Klein knows this and will be easily re-elected.

Oops...my last post was entered incomplete, but I think you get the idea. The only thing I was going to add was that Jack Layton might be able to convince the gov't to include an amnesty period pleading with people to return their "blow-up" dolls to their local police station.

If indeed 51% of Cdns are against sex toys, then maybe this is not such a bad idea after all. We could create a specially trained sex toy police unit aided by appropriately trained German Sheppards to invade people's homes when it is suspected that they possess such contraband. We could call them the "Dildo Squad". We could then get hookers off the streets because they would have rewarding employment teaching officers of the evils of such devices and how they are frequently used. Of course, police would have to remember that strip searches should not be conducted because these people might actually enjoy them. Handcuffs would NEVER EVER