RNG

Hell, I joined the Conservatives only because a bunch of old white guys had highjacked democracy and installed Rob Anders for a few elections. A good nominee showed up and I wanted to vote for her just because Anders is a puppet who doesn't do anything except when the old white guys whistle. Well, they managed to finagle things such that my membership wasn't activated till two days after the nomination vote. A total joke. So it's not just immigrants. But since it was old white guys, it's OK. NOT!

Exactly. If you can't create wealth you have to print money. Then you get a Zimbabwe or a US in a few years if they don't take drastic action.

Unfortunately, IIRC the quoted inflation rate is usually excluding energy and food. And yes, vote NDP and have the economy sink and enjoy hyperinflation.

I have heard one legitimate argument in favor of the monarchy. In the US, if you critisize the president you are de-facto critisizing the country. Whereas we can critisize Harper or Martin or whoever, but they aren't the symbol of our country, the Governor General, ie the monarch is.

I think their stratagists figure that "NDP" has a bit of negative attached to it in the view of the soft Liberals they are trying to convert, but Layton has been presenting himself very well, so emphasize your positives.

No.

For many elections, my wife and I disagreed mightely on the right political choice, so we had competing signs on our lawn. Recently she has changed and is espousing my political bent. But we are now in a condo apartment so can't have a sign. Bummer.

Iggy et al are getting more and more desperate.

The fact of the matter is that it is very poor politics. I don't for a minute think Harper knew any of this stuff. He would not have tolerated it knowing that the press and the opposition would have a field day. My two best theories are that some beaurocrat recommended him to someone in the PMO, either because he owed a favour, or because he is a bitter Lib supporter. I lean towards the first right now because I misplaced my tinfoil hat.

I think not. It has been the NDP wanting money pissed away on useless unproductive sh .. tuff.

That comment sir, not annointed with a smiley, doesn't fit in the spirit of these pages. I been there. It's OK. Like most, better than some worse than others. And what makes your neck of the woods so freaking wonderful?

Fixed, sorry.

Has anyone watched the OP video?

But has anyone watched the video? Comments.

I actually dug through some dictionaries and still can't exactly nail it definitivly. Is a tax cut a subsidy? I think not. It's just taking less of what isn't the government's in the first place, IMHO. What say you?

For how long in Canada was the pension fund just a number in a ledger? The CPP deductions were in fact just dumped into general revenue and pissed away. We now have an actual CPP pension fund and it is doing pretty well investing in the markets. I'm not sure how the fed is on it's pension/benefit liability to our civil servants, but the US is sunk. All the talk and moaning about their debt and deficite is real but the numbers bandied about by the MSM don't include Social Security liabilities. But at least you can find those numbers for the US if you dig. I have never seen that type of data for Canada.

I don't know how many of you are aware that a small town in the US SE was is such bad financial shape that it has totally defaulted on all pension payments and benefits. And many cities and several states are almost there. Take the time to watch this video. Very interesting indeed. Implementation anywhere where there is an existing system would require at least some sort of grandfathering mechanism, but I love it. (Can one imbed a video on this forum, and if so, how?)

You just described me to a "T". I also don't agree with Harper's tough on crime stuff.

True, but of little significance. And Libya is in OPEC

The entire problem is that Harper has never had a majority so couldn't get it through. If, hopefully he gets it this time, an elected senate is on the table.

I'm not denying that there are systems in place to handle it. But I am saying that it still causes disruption. How many of you have been in a corporate environment when your boss either quit, was fired or was promoted to a different section. It causes problems. It won't bring the company down, but it causes problems. And Lord knows the government has enough problems and a hard enough time to operate efficiently without further perturbation.

Finally, I find a philosopher on this forum. Thank you.

It's still destabilizing to change leaders. In fact it may be easier in the states since all the VP is, is a president-in-waiting.

Probably back in 1900 that was true. But starting with Trudeau and worse and worse since, including Torys O/E, with maybe the exception of Clark, the idealistic fool, the power is all concentrated in the PM now. Maybe with a little given to the odd cabinet minister. The average MP is a totally centrally controled robot or rapidly becomes an independent. So although on paper you are correct, in practice, that ain't the way it works.

First, I am glad that the others had the class not to bring up the subject of Layton's health. But in my opinion, it is a valid concern. It is quite destabilizing to have to change leadership part way through a mandate. Our system and that of the US are quite different, but they concider things like the medical file of the presidential candidates needed information.