Cartman

Last I read on StatsCan data, only .5% of Canadians are committed to living in a same-sex relationship. We can only assume that a fraction of these people are interested in formal marriage. So really...why does this cause so much anger particularly at a time when heterosexuals seem to be running away from traditional marriage? I would assume that the data is similar in the US. Check it out. http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/22/canad...a/census_021022

Actually, now that you mention it. I cannot wrap my head around how single women with children make it work without some form of affordable day care (unless they live near family willing to assist them). During the election, a woman on CBC claimed that in Van. she paid $1000. a month for the care of her two children and that there were terribly long waiting lists. Brutal.

Do you think that the Alberta Alliance will get anywhere anytime soon? I guess they got one seat so, really, they are not too far away from the official opposition. You are quite right, there are a lot of red Tories out here especially in the North. A strange concept perhaps, but one that makes sense out here (since there really is little opposition to the Cons right now).

Now I think that was a well articulated response...one of the best I have read. True enough, even if women's earnings were simply discretionary (which they usually are not), why would they choose to work in the pink ghetto? Without women's incomes, the poverty rate in Canada would be dramatically higher. Hawk, I think you need to respond to RB's response.

Are you referring to blatant censorship or media bias in terms of what they consider we want to hear? Did you have a particular example(s)?

Wow Caesar...hate to admit it, but you caught me pre-judging too I guess.

Great article Kimmy. I have also read that because we were the first to start reducing our deficit (partly because of economic growth), we are also the first to be able to expand services. The other provinces delayed. But what I just cannot get is why the hell Ralph made those dumb comments that cost Harper quite a few votes? Apparently there are Alberta Cons. who were a little choked at him. When he said that he would release the news two days after the fed. election, he added to the fears that Cons. had a "secret agenda". Without a policy convention, this gave Martin a lot of ammunition. Had he come out and publicly defended the system and demonstrated this info. in your article, he might have made a big difference for the Cons.

If the above is correct, then I am with you all the way on this one IMR. Quite frankly, I know little about this station except for what an Iranian friend has told me. He claimed that it was good at presenting info. from this part of the world, but that it was also biased (like CNN). Was the above info. on TV or on their website? I would like to investigate this one.

True enough, but they have rebounded dramatically since 1993. That's kinda old news now.

I doubt that Canada/US relations affected the vote in any significant way.

Now that's funny.

I hope that somebody has not already posted this item already. http://sympatico.msn.globeandmail.com/serv...patico-business What do you think?

Hmmm...didn't the Japanese build their ecoonomy quite quickly by limiting foreign ownership? I am not sure how to feel about this one. It seems as though you need to be integrated into the world economy and welcome FI, but you must also maintain a measure of economic independence and self-reliance. Perhaps the real question is how much foreign ownership is ideal?

I wonder if Alberta would have such a strong energy base if fed $$ were not pumped into the Province's oil industry to begin with?

Maybe Mercer overdoes it, but I hardly consider it a hate show. Conan, Jon Stewart, Moore and Bill Maher are pretty tough on Americans and their leaders. Mercer is getting worn out anyways, he'll be gone soon. I checked the homepage (very quickly I admit) and it does not look that bad. http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage I wonder if there is a specific topic or comment that bothers you IMR?

I think that it is interesting to take a look at posts with the most replies and views. It seems as though people are really intrigued by the Conservatives/Harper and by regionalism. Why might this be the case? Are we sensationalist? Do we represent other Canadians? Any other themes from "Big Leaguers"? Are these repeat themes?

How can Bush (the ultimate conservative neo-liberal) cut taxes and engage in war? He is encouraging a deficit. I am suggesting that a health care premium IS a tax and that there are three levels of government but only one level of taxpayer. You can call it a premium, user-fee, extra-bill whatever, it is still a tax. The only major difference is that it is a flat tax. By the way, I am not a Liberal. I never have voted Liberal and never will. Why do people persist on labeling others? Are you so insecure about your own logic that you must throw mud? I must say, however, that Martin and Chretien are a right wing economist's dream team. They reduced the deficit dramatically (on the backs of ordinary Canadians) while Mulroney and Wilson said over and over again that they would and never did. In fact, the deficit get growing and growing until the Liberals formed government. Budget slashing is not simply the domain of Conservatives. Actually, if you read "The Politics of Taxation in Canada" (nominated for the Donner award) by Hale, he points out that the Mulroney government was actually more sympathetic to the poor (economically) than Chretien's Liberals. These Liberals are far more ruthless than the PC's. Guess why Harper is not PM?

Let us use another situation shall we? This time it will be realistic and there will be 10 people who shop at Wal-Mart (8 WORKING poor, 1 middle-class and 1 upper-class). Without the purchases of the working poor, the company goes under. The purchases of the latter two are far less important in a volume economy. And that, boys and girls, journalists, and university professors, is how the economy works.

Your premise is that right-wing economic policies have made Alberta a utopia. Mulroney pursued right-wing economics and he generated large deficits. You cannot only blame Trudeau. Governments are not just about balancing budgets. They are about creating a better society in general for everyone. At times, this includes expanding social programs. We do have an environmental deficit in Alberta which will eventually have to be paid. BTW...how can you say on one hand, that Trudeau as PM created the debt, but on the other, that Chretien as PM did not eliminate the deficit? I will give ya that coke if Ralph reduces taxes (including health care premiums).

The point here was that these women have not chosen marriage or to have children and they still earn less than men despite a university degree and a desire for a career. How do you explain why females now outnumber males in university? Are they just trying to look cute and get a guy? I would assume that they are seeking careers. Getting sarcastic and personal only reduces the credibility of your argument. But, as a MALE statistics prof. in my mid-thirties, holding almost no debt and earning a decent living along with five and a half months off a year (to publish), I am pretty happy. I never said I faced discrimination, but many women do. Why should their talents be wasted or devalued? 90% of women eh? Wow. BTW...why don't you go into "the most important" career? Men can help raise children. Dude...you sound like Dr. Evil. He wasn't real. For political correctness? Well...ok! We can place them in pools of water containing ill-tempered bass with "laser" beams on their heads. We will call it the Alan Parsons Project. Whatever

Chretien's federal Liberals did far more to eliminate the debt in Canada than Mulroney's PC's ever did. How are they are left wing? Maybe Harris was left wing too? How can we in Alberta claim to be alienated if everything is so perfect here? You must be lacking the ability to accomplish something in order to be alienated. Why did Klein help destroy Harper's election chances by saying that he might violate the Canada Health Care Act? I suspect that put as much fear into voters as Martin could have ever dreamed to. Next year we can still expect to see health care premiums (aka tax) and more privatization of services. If I am wrong I miss Reagan, I owe you a coke (I mean a Pepsi, red coke can colours indicate liberal left-winger commies made it ). Hey...wait a minute, why is the U of Calgary in terrible debt? Damn left wingers! :angry:

1. Morality. It is simply wrong to profit from another person's suffering. 2. Self-interest. It will lead to more terrorism and I am not sure how the Americans are going to pay for this especially when Bush hands out tax breaks. You cannot do both at the same time. War is costly. Stoker, you might be right about WWI and II, but war is now often about business.

Since I first watched a CBC story on fish farms and the sea lice problem, I have never eaten fish again YUK! I will take my chances with mad cow thank you very much. Alberta environmental laws are pathetic compared to BC. Privatized liquor stores do not have to take back empty bottles and grocery stores do not have to take back any of the waste (plastics, bottles, cardboard etc) they produce. Essentially, you can waste as much as you want here without penalty. I am not a huge environmentalist either, but people do not even want to try the little things. I asked my condo association to create a recycling area inside the roomy building for the garbage and was told no way. At one point in time, Ralph was Minister of Environment

I used to think highly of Harper, but if he has to re-consider his leadership after one loss with significant gains (seats) and no policy convention, then I think he should just hand over the job to someone else. We need strong leadership in this country, not a whimp that seeks out affirmation at every challenge. Wonder why he was initially in favour of the war in Iraq and then suddenly, mysteriously changed his mind? At least Stockwell believed in himself. Whatta baby! :angry:

Can anyone really argue this one? Without big business, the US would not be able to engage in war. Or, do people believe that Bush is so noble as to be concerned primarily about morality? If so, I am sure that there are many other nations without oil that would like to be "liberated".