Bryan

This should go in the "Broken Justice" thread. Besides, Chretien was not exactly "cleared" by Teitelbaum in anything remotely resembling the spin the liberal media is putting on this: http://blog.macleans.ca/2008/06/26/untotal...n/#comment-8792

She's been receiving treatments for thyroid cancer.

If people were at all concerned about inferior care for their kids, they wouldn't be lining up for the crap-fest that's offered by subsidized/regulated daycares. They'd be using quality private care, or taking care of their own kids.

You still have to have people to delegate tasks to. Controlling what everyone does and says is good management. Trying to actually do it all yourself, not so much.

The way I look at it, we don't have any right wing choices in Canada, unless you count the Christian Heritage Party. The so-called Conservatives are firmly in the middle, plucking things from all sides, more from the left than the right lately. The Liberals are slightly left leaning socially, but right leaning fiscally, again right in the middle. Really, the NPD is the only party that doesn't cater to the middle ground or the right. Me? Mostly right, with a few centre-left social considerations. The Reform Party was the PERFECT political entity as far as lining up with my ideals. Virtually every line in their policy manual was as if I had written it for them.

Oh Noes!! They might expose Harper for not caring about Unicorns or The Tooth Fairy too!!!

Loaded questions give you loaded answers. In any honestly worded poll I've ever seen, they want it to remain, but ONLY if they still at least have the right to market their own grain. Can you honestly say you've actually met farmers who do not at least want the right to market their own grain, even if they don't intent to act on it? I sure as heck haven't. What the CPC is doing falls directly in line with what I've heard farmers demanding for decades.

We have a dual market system right now. CWB is not a national system, it does not have jurisdiction over all Canadian wheat and barley, only the western grains. Your constant reference to the WTO implies that CWB's only option would be to fold. No consideration is given to them just changing the way they operate. If farmers were allowed to sell their grain elsewhere, CWB would cease to be a "single desk", it would just be one available marketing option. CWB could adapt to become whatever sort of commodity broker that does follow the WTO rules. Frankly, what I see as a much bigger issue is how the charter rights of the CWB are protected, but the rights of the western farmers to conduct their business in the same manner that those in other parts of the country are not.

So does David Suzuki.

To me, this sounds a lot like the logic that the detax people use. Buyer beware.

Yet. A national program was what was promised repeatedly. The fixed time has never stopped the provinces from coming forward with more money demands. The reason the right has trouble getting majorities in Canada is because most people ARE stupid.

Are you on glue? The provinces are ALWAYS asking for more. And more, and more, and more. A new national social program. That's what Martin said over and over again. The provinces would keep their hands out until that's what it truly was. It HAD TO be cancelled. Well, 3 of 4 is about right. That pretty close to the ratio of people I meet on the street who are irretrievably stupid. The same people who think that TV they got with their new bed was actually free, that their cell phone plan is really just $20/mo, or that the used car dealer is really giving them that car for below his cost.

Making diesel cost more is probably the single dumbest thing Dion could do. Trucks use diesel. Trucks that ship food, clothes, furniture, and appliances. Fabulous. "Revenue neutral" is always a lie. ALWAYS. If any tax really was revenue neutral, that alone would erase any point in doing it.

It's a little more than $400/mo. (I said nearly 25%) Regardless: That is for full-time, full days, as needed. I try to minimize the number of hours she's there by dropping off late, picking up early, or just keeping her with me on as many days as I can, but we are paying the full-time rate. There are 4 children in total being cared for, but seldom more than 3 at a time. They are supplied lunch and snacks. Meals are of our choosing, and that was a big one for us, as our daughter is a picky eater. Peanut butter is one of the few things you can get her to eat every time and all the govt daycares had peanut bans. They get to go outside as often and as long as weather permits. This was also huge. I can't even count the number of times I picked my son up from daycare when he had not been outside all day. The sitter has lots of fun structures and such in her fenced yard for the kids to play on. They also go to the park, play groups, the library, the Zoo, etc, several times per week. She can bring whatever she wants to the babysitter, so she can bring books, toys, dress-up clothes, a movie, etc. If there's an institutional daycare that can match this level of service, I've sure as heck never seen it. Not in Manitoba anyway.

Which Mexican-built cars are junk?

I think this is perfectly legitimate business model. It's up to those contractors to decide if it's worth their time. In some restaurants, the tip money far exceeds the wages anyway. With a few tweaks in the policy (like perhaps a commission on the value of the meals ordered), the owner should be able to go right back to doing this. Hairdressers and salesmen often have similar arrangements. That's what confuses me about some of the other posters claims of underground economy paying LESS. People don't go underground to make less, they do it to make more.

The first year funding at the same rate the Liberals wanted did not create any spaces? The Liberals plan, that the CPC honored for the first year, did not do what it was designed to do? What did they do with the money? It was for spaces, and they used it for something else. If anything, all that proves the CPC were correct in canceling it, before the provinces came forward with their hands out again. "it wasn't enough, we need more". For DAYCARE? No, it's not fair. I don't deserve the CPC benefit. I'm just happy that if the public thinks the government is somehow responsible for funding childcare (at least partially), that it's at least being handed out in a method that's a more fair to everyone with kids to care for, rather than just to those who send their children to be warehoused.

I firmly believe that we should trust the science. That is why I don't believe in AGW. It isn't science, it's politics.

Repeat offender. Serious threat to the public. There is no way he should ever see the outside of a prison again on what now amounts to his seventh conviction for child molestation. And the judge gives him 25 months. Insane, and inexcusable.

Some kids never need physical enforcement of any kind, others do. It's a personality issue, not one of environment. Some people respond to carrots, other require a stick. My daughter always listens and does what she's told, and never needs me to so much as raise my voice at her. She likes structure, and wants to know what the rules are so she can happily do what's expected. There's never been an issue where the subject of spanking would even come up. My son on the other hand, is far more independent. Not only does he not want to follow the rules, he also likes to find out for himself what the consequences of not following those rules might be, including not following whatever non-physical punishment you might impose. Eventually, you run out of answers to his "or what?", and "or I'm going to get the wooden spoon" becomes the only thing that motivates him. As long as the spanking threat is real (that is, at some point, you have actually used it if he challenged the threat), then the mere mention will work.

As people learn more about what it actually proposes, the opposition will skyrocket. A lot of people mistakenly think that this bill is just about downloading, and people are split on that. It's the restrictions on what you can do with things you bought and paid for that will anger any intelligent person. DRM only infringes on the basic rights of the consumer, it does nothing to stop piracy. The penalties are completely out of whack with the offense too. Depending on the circumstances, between $500 and $20,000 per infraction? Since some of the supporters of this bill like to keep trotting out inappropriate car analogies, let's apply that logic to car theft. One song costs 99 cents or less to download legally. That means a car thief should get around a ten million dollar fine per car he steals.

$100/month, directly. Plus a reduction in my overall taxes being deducted every week, and a substantial increase in the amount I got back in my tax return. Yes, those other tax considerations are separate issues technically unrelated to child care, but they are just an overview of That $100 accounts for nearly 25% of my child care costs. That's pretty substantial in my book, and I can't see how (on a per child basis) anyone could argue that it's not enough. It's a lot more than I would have advocated for had I been asked prior to the policy being enacted, and certainly more than anyone "deserves". I'd rather see them cut back the funding for both, drastically. Welfare is far too available (especially here in Manitoba), it turns the government into an enabler for generational problems. It should take a lot of work to get on welfare, so much so that it's just not worth it because getting a job is easier.

That would be a huge mistake. Politicians always lament the lack of the youth vote. Nothing they do seems ot get them to even pay attention. If a politician wanted an issue that would motivate the youth, and get them to vote in numbers previously unheard of, this is it. CPC brings this legislation forward at their own peril. It won't just be the end of the government for them, it will be literally the end of the party. They will not only find themselves facing united opposition from the left, but a significant number of their established core. We won't get a chance at a right leaning government again many years. If the Liberals are smart, they will ride this issue, and make it front and centre. This is exponentially worse politically than the carbon tax.

CPC continued the EXISTING fed-prov agreement, they did not implement a new national daycare social program (based on Quebec's $7/day program) that the Liberals were promising during the election. That's why the CPC scaled back the existing plan too: to prevent it from escalating in cost as more people held out their hands. "$2 billion, then $5 billion", the Liberals said (while some economists said the real cost could be over $15 billion). "Screw that", the CPC said, "here's $250 million, now STFU". What they DID, was manage the cost, instead of turning it into another gun registry money pit. Lot of people were in favor of that, look how it turned out. Also remember that the Liberals promised over and over again such plans since Pearson, and never delivered. While what the CPC did does fall short of what the Liberals promised (thank god), unlike the Liberals the Conservatives actually did SOMETHING. People for some reason seem to think that broken promises are OK, as long as they are BIG promises, but promising less, but actually delivering is somehow worse.

^^Dead links^^ As far as I'm concerned, the only people who thought that the Liberal plan was better were people who think the government should hand them everything and raise their children for them (and there are a lot of those), and those who clearly did not understand the real costs of the Liberal plan. What has happened every time a national social program was ever implemented in this country? First, they made it mandatory, to the exclusion of all others. When it comes to taking care of my kids, this is unacceptable. Then, they made it cost exponentially more than was proposed, and raised taxes to cover the difference. I don't care what the purpose, if the Liberals say "new social program", the answer is "NO!!". If you can't make arrangements to take care of your own kids without government holding your hand for you, you have no business having kids. These people who want the government to warehouse their children at everyone else's expense should have those kids taken away from them.