yvestar

This is such a bogus argument. The American territories are connected to the USA. Much the same as Canadian territories to Canada. Their is very little difference between the two definitions except American territories cannot vote in federal elections. So I guess, Alaska and Hawaii are extra-stately dependencies that are not part of the American territory(mainland)? And what about the Arizona Territory? (I'm quoting below an American poster in another forum) The US has added to its territory through purchases, wars, negotiations, and outright confiscation of territory. The territories that comprise the 48 contiguous states today were not completely assimilated until 1912, when the Arizona Territory became the 48th state to be admitted to the union. IIRC, it takes 60,000 votes to apply for statehood, and without special allowances from Congress (as in D.C.), people in territories are citizens but they cannot vote in federal elections which pivot on statehood and provisions of the US Constitution. They can vote in local and territorial elections.

The territories were purchased by the Canadian government from the Hudson's Bay Company. It can be said they were annexed. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book...ionary&va=annex annex: to incorporate (a country or other territory) within the domain of a state Anyhow, it's irrelevant if they were annexed or not. The fact remains: the territories are not provincial and should not be granted the same political decision making power as the provinces. I'm not a big fan of US politics but they have it right this time when it comes to a territory and voting in federal politics. These territorial residents are full citizens (ie birth certificate, passport) of USA with the exception they cannot vote in federal elections. In order for the Canadian territories to receive a lot more money in the future to become provinces sooner, they must give something up in return.

They are US citizens. They are officially a part of the USA. They pay federal taxes. http://cefus.net/background/ These are not stand-alone colleges or univerisities. Big difference. It's not the only reason.

Respectfully, I disagree. I've indicated my reasons above. The territories are not provincial enough. Neither is any state in the USA.

The point is, the territories are not provinces.

It's not the point. The territories are not provinces, period. I never suggested any of this. In fact, I'm proposing the federal government give more money to the territories in exchange for federally disfranchising them. The more money the territories receive the faster they mature to become provinces. It's a plain and simple strategy to obtain provincial status quicker and it involves a lot of MONEY!

I'm suggesting that provinces can be fully represented at the federal level while the territories can be represented without any voting power at this level. You obviously misread the intent of my letter. In NO WAY do I make reference of the people living in the territories as to being children versus being adults. Please read my letter more carefully. Thanking you in advance. I am saying, a territory (not the people living in the territory) does not have the same maturity as the provinces do, therefore the former should not be given full rights in national decision-making.

In case you don't know North American history, it was non-natives who invaded this land. First Nations should have a significant means to preserve their culture by living in and maintaining reserves. Have you considered inflation or supply and demand forces? Even though I don't agree with wage regulating, isn't that what you are proposing? Would you like your wage to be capped? Does Klein the Conservative agree to government involvement in any wage regulating, including his own wage? So what. Write to him anyways and ask for an income tax cut.

Hawk, Setting aside political partisanship at the moment, First Nations free education is a very small portion of the total Canadian education system. Eliminating this would not have much effect. As for global reduction of tuition fees, who is going to pay for the rising cost and expansion of post-secondary overhead? In the last federal budget, the government has promised $13 Billion towards the military. With regards to taxes, if you feel so strongly about it, write to Klein and other MPPs and ask them to lower the provincial tax rate, since the Alberta Treasury has a surplus afterall. If you're an independant thinker, tell us how Klein should spend the surplus.

Tawasakm, Based on your description, the student turned taxpayer repays the fees using the amount exceeding a minimum tax. In other words, the student is repaying his fees and only paying a minimum tax or in other words, the student is theoretically not repaying his fees though paying full tax.

We'd lose Canadian sovereinty in the north if we dumped them entirely. Maybe a country like China or Russia would love to annex the territories. Though I doubt the USA would sit back and let it happen. The USA may end up annexing them instead.

I don't know if it makes any sense, but it's probably worth looking at. In this system, it appears the student is compensated for getting an education and owing more tax dollars to the government. The end result is their education is free or they pay less tax.

Hawk, If you haven't noticed, the Federal and Alberta governments have huge budget surpluses.

caesar, As so far, their seat in federal parliament is irrelevant: A non-voting seat would accomplish the same as their current single voting seat. They still get representation because they are allowed to speak their views in federal parliament. It would be much more wise for the Territories to give up their voting seat in exhange for a non-voting seat and a lot more money to expand their people and land infrastructure; resulting in becoming a province a lot quicker.

I think gender-biased pricing is mostly non-existant. If this were a true phenomenon then males should pay less in auto and life insurance while women paid the same as men. I'll gladly meet women half way in haircut and dry cleaning prices while they meet us half way so men pay less in auto and life insurance premiums. The politician who brought this up obviously did not thoroughly inform himself before suggesting this bill.