Grantler

Canada is indeed not the most costly place to conduct business if you take away the health care costs companies must pay that are not tallied into the corporate tax rates.

Agreed. It was quite the contrary. The British did indeed conquer the people but just, for the first time in its Imperial history, allowed them to stay on the territory in question.

This entire case is just bewildering and it is hard to come to terms with what is going on. The husband of the woman in question has moved on to another love. Since this is the case, I would tend to think that his rights in controlling the life of Terri should be revoked. Now, onto the courts. I do not think that this is an area in which courts should be able to impose there own decisions. Just because Terri cannot state that she wants to live does not mean that she wants to die. It is basically a 50/50 chance which one she prefers. What gives a panel of officials who have no connection with the human being in question the right to terminate her life? I do not think that there is anything. The problem here, I fear, is that the courts and the people in support of pulling the plug believe in a higher power and that she will be better with her maker. Well, death may just be nothing at all. If death is nothing at all, wouldn't it be better to let someone exist, no matter what the state, as long as they do not give signs as to the opposite. Maybe Terri likes waking up to see her family. Possibly, to herself, she can tell who is who in her life but just cant express it outwardly. This is totally possible. Just because she cannot express herself does not mean she cannot think and is impartial to feelings. Many people also argue that if they were in that situation that they would want to die. Well, unless we are in that position I do not think we can jump to that conclusion. Look at cancer patients for example. When diagnosed there is a tendency to go into a sort of depression with a negative outlook on life. But, after you become accustomed to the situation people persevere. They love life for the gift it is. I am not saying that in a religious sense, I am just saying that overall. Being born is a miracle in itself. Just look at the odds against one sperm making it, ahead of all the others, to one egg...and that is just the beginning. Life is too special to put its termination based on what we may perceive as a pain and agony filled existance. Furthermore, what does keeping her alive hurt anyone? Her family has already stated that they will care for her and do not require the husband's presense in day to day life. Why not grant that wish and forget about the situation and let Terri's life run its course? I mean, if it wasn't the year 2005 with media covering ever inch of every event, most of us would have not even heard about Terri and her family would be taking care of her in peace.

I have trouble placing it as a genocide mainly because the worst things done to the natives occurred before that resolution was put in place..thus..allowing the resolution to pin itself to events that already happened in order to term them as genocides...

When you look at the basic tax structure in Canada in regards to what we charge business, it is not more than the United States. To be perfectly clear, if you take into account the % of tax placed on businesses the USA hit 40% and Canada comes in at around 36%. If you add in the money Canadian companies use on health care though they become essentially equal. What really is driving companies away is not so much our taxes but the lack of fair taxation elsewhere. The globalized economy is just killing us and really we can't decrease taxes low enough to stop the drive of some companies to other nations. For example, for every one working a company in Canada employs it could employ 15 in China. Not to mention China's environment standards...umm...wait...lack of standards. It is just impossible to say what Canada can do in terms of lowering taxes because whether they decrease or not we still will be at a disadvantage if companies want to make the move. China is changing everything. They are buying up the worlds raw materials and forcing the dollar up. We are in big trouble here and it is something that lower taxes cannot help.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...Story/National/ What do people think of this thing? I know that I am a man and when I go to get my haircut its at a barber and its done within 10 minutes....buzzzzzzzz I don't get it styled etc. I guess I am just lost with what this bill really looks to accomplish...anyone care about this one? I think that it is just a bill though... It probably should be posted in the provincial section seeing as it relates to Ontario but I think that it would set a federal precedent. Do the courts really need to be backlogged with haircut lawsuits?

Hopefully that messege above clears up.

In fact, the books are more than balanced; the federal government expects to post a $4-billion "underlying budgetary surplus" next year. *****I think that the bellyaching about paying the debt down with every nickel of surplus has to end. We are operating on what, our 8th, 9th, or 10th balanced budget? That is something unheard of in a welfare state. If they wanted to pay it down, they would, and they do. They know alot more than you or I abuot paying down a debt that has a lot more to do with the economy than the 4 billion dollars they are holding onto. Low-income earners, for example, will benefit from the move to increase the amount Canadians can earn tax-free from just over $8,000 to $10,000. As a result, finance officials expect approximately 860,000 people to be removed from the tax roll. I don't approve of people paying no taxes. If you're not contributing then why should you be able to vote and influence how money is spent? ****This is a rediculous statement on your behelf. Bumping the tax-free amount up from $8,000 to $10,000 is a very noble move by the government. If you think that a human being can live a comfortable adult life off of even $10,000 you are missing the point. There are for more taxes than income tax so why do we desire to see the students/poor dishing out what little money they are going to have to put into the economy anyway to pay for the cost of living? Funding for the health-care deal reached with the premiers is included, as is the often-discussed $5-billion, five-year pledge to kickstart a national daycare program. Canada's military, which has long complained of neglect, is also paid significant attention -- with a $12.8 billion promise that Goodale says amounts to the biggest boost in military spending in 20 years. These figures always sound better when you add them up over 5 years, don't they? As I understand it the military commitments the Liberals have made (afghanistan, bosnia, Hait, etc) have caused the miltiary to be about $1.5 billion in the hole per year. So most of that extra money is merely going to allow them to balance the books. They still need a massive infusion of capital funding to buy new equipment, which is rotting away. No sign of that in the budget. The money for health care is nice, but won't do much. health care needs to be restructured but they haven't got the balls or the will. As for daycare, it's unaffordable at this time. Maybe if we get the debt paid off we might be able to eventually. ****The federal government said it will spend $2.7 billion between 2007 and 2010 on helicopters, trucks, aircraft and a training facility for JTF2, Canada's special forces unit. This is stated clearly within the budget if you would take time to read it before spazzing out about it. Jesus Christ. If the military is commending it, what gives someone like you the desire to harp on about it on half true facts? An additional $3.4 billion in international assistance, in line with United Nations Millennium Development Goals Giving away billions which will help few or no one. There are systemic problems with third world governmental structures which mean that no amount of money will do much to aleviate their problems. *****But, I am sure you are one of the first people to support UN decisions that defend human rights and the like. We have an obligation to the Organization and they suggested that we need to increase out international assisstance. Believe it or not, we are one of the more desirable places in the world and we have some obligations to the UN and the world community because of it whether we like it or now. If you look at the statement, "in line wit hthe United Nations Millennium Development goals." $398 million over five years to help settle and integrate new immigrants to Canada Trying to teach immigrants how to speak English because we (the government and its immigrant lobby groups) think it's not politically correct to require that they learn that before coming here. ****While I do disagree with this point, it is only $398 million dollars and the immigrant population of Canada is what the nation was built on correct? We have to accept that in order to compete internationally we need to attract a high quality immigrant and giving them some sort of benefits, ie train in English, is not such a bad idea when many of our native borns are going elsewhere. $4.7 billion over five years, including $1 billion to cut greenhouse gases and $200 million to boost wind energy Basically grants to corporations and individuals to put in energy conservation equipment or materials ****Well, in a competitive global marketplace we really have no choice if we want to save the environment. We need to give industry a chance to move in the proper direction with some easy urging. They could always pack up and tack their jobs to China where the words environmental protection do not exist.

I say we follow through with what almost happened on the West Wing. Let Tony Blair send some fighter-bombers over to strike nuclear plants. Iran is a big threat to the Europe. Missiles are capable of getting halfway to London already. But, then again, I think that bombing is the answer to a lot of the world's problems.

Alberta is a province that is blessed by geography. They have oil. Apparently that puts them above parts of Canada that are not so fortunate.

LOL that second part is a good point. I agree...many of the people that are in university are just there to make rich daddy happy. And, I think that if a Clinton type president is elected, Canada would move away from the 'hate'.

In fact, the books are more than balanced; the federal government expects to post a $4-billion "underlying budgetary surplus" next year. In that context, Goodale's plan promises a broad sweep of tax relief measures. Low-income earners, for example, will benefit from the move to increase the amount Canadians can earn tax-free from just over $8,000 to $10,000. As a result, finance officials expect approximately 860,000 people to be removed from the tax roll. Canadians who take advantage of tax-sheltered RRSPs are also promised a break, with a boost in contribution limits to $22,000 by 2009. And those who have money in RRSPs will also have more freedom on how to spend it -- with the immediate elimination of foreign content restrictions. Businesses of all sizes can also expect a break, as the government begins a five-year plan to phase out the two per cent corporate surtax. The general corporate income tax rate will also be cut in four years, dropping two points to 19 per cent. In terms of big-ticket spending, Goodale's plan delivers on some long-anticipated spending priorities. Funding for the health-care deal reached with the premiers is included, as is the often-discussed $5-billion, five-year pledge to kickstart a national daycare program. Canada's military, which has long complained of neglect, is also paid significant attention -- with a $12.8 billion promise that Goodale says amounts to the biggest boost in military spending in 20 years. Other highlights of the federal budget plan include: - An additional $3.4 billion in international assistance, in line with United Nations Millennium Development Goals - Increasing Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits for low-income seniors by $2.7 billion over five years. - $1 billion for an innovative Clean Fund to further stimulate cost-effective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. - Implementing the pledge to share $5 billion worth of gas tax revenue over the next five years: In 2005–06, the share of the federal gas tax dedicated to cities and communities will be $600 million. By 2009–10, the share will increase to $2 billion, representing 5 cents per litre. - $4.7 billion over five years, including $1 billion to cut greenhouse gases and $200 million to boost wind energy - $1 billion to further strengthen Canada's national security - $735 million over the next five years, in addition to the - $700 million over five years for Aboriginal health programs announced in September 2004 - $398 million over five years to help settle and integrate new immigrants to Canada - $345 million over the next five years for First Nations early learning and child care, special education, and child and family services. - $340 million over the next five years for First Nations housing on reserves, Aboriginal languages and culture, and the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. - $60 million for the CBC in 2005–06 - $70 million a year to Sport Canada, doubling its ongoing funding to $140 million in 2005–06 from $70 million in 2004–05.

I really don't think that this is a problem for us. We have the ability to think for ourselves and find information that is availible out there that isn't all about human interest and making a buck. As for China and N. Korea, the only way they can exist as know is by keeping the truth about how much more advanced our society is from them. It would mean the end of power in those countries.

I see its rapping time.... At least it isnt a rendition of Weird Al's Amish Paradise

Further arguments are here, I dont feel that I have the right to post some in from other people but you can still read them... http://www.getfreebb.com/members/index.php...F&showtopic=60) ----------------------- As for proportional representation, that five party system won't be the only party. You will have the gay rights party, the beer party, the asians for control of Canada party, the white power party, canadian nazis....you will have it all...and in order to stop any from gaining power you will have to impose a 5% minimum on votes....therefore wasting tons of votes like in a FPTP system.....and...don't forget, you will have no national party and therefore be unable to get any laws passed that benifit one part of the country and not the other....how many Ontarians will support a goverment that passes $23 billion out to have not provinces? This is just one example.

Maybe it is just a problem in Canada that we really do not have a defined political culture...more often then not undecided people vote to punish than vote to support. They do not know what they want at all...just what they don't want.

Just in addition to this thread I was recently talking to some university friends who were discussing not allowing Americans, even if they were in dire need in the future, to have any fresh water out of Canada because Bush is an idiot. These are well educated university students. People do not realize that in 3.5 years there will be a new president everyone will love and Americans won't be so bad after all and Bush will fade to be judged by history. This type of attitude from Canadians who judge Americans by their president is rediculous. Imagine what the general publics sentiment is if educated people have such misjudged beliefs.

I just think that there are more importanty Canadian symbols than one that represents a foreign monarch. I know that foreign moarch might be a stretch but Canada does control her own destiny and I am proud of the people that fought for that right. I believe that in the modern world the need to hold onto Britain through a symbolic office is unecessary. I too am proud of the British connection but it no longer needs to be practiced by a 19.1 million dollar office. You obviously think we need a symbol to remind us of our history. That is totally kewl, but I think that my position isn't one of being uneducated about what she represents, its just that I don't see a need for it.

Oh come on, cut those poor Americans some slack. They will elect a Clinton-like present next time around and we will be pushing and shoving to see him/her get off the plane in Ottawa to talk about how they are going to prop NAFTA up.

Why think about it? That is all she is. Just because she is a breathing and living and wasteful symbol doesn't make her anything more.

Some facts: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/governorgeneral/ ------------------------------------------------ WHAT Queen's representative in Canada and Canada's de facto head of state. ***(The Queen is the official head of state.) DUTIES The Governor General's duties, which are largely ceremonial, include: Representing the Crown and ensuring there is always a prime minister. Acting on advice of prime minister and cabinet ministers to give royal assent to bills passed in the Senate and House of Commons. Signing state documents. Reading throne speech. Presiding over swearing-in of prime minister, chief justice and cabinet ministers. BUDGET (2004 est.) Office budget set at $19.1 million, the same as in 2003 and up from $11 million in 1999. Governor General's spending totalled $41 million in 2003, counting costs to the Department of National Defence, RCMP and other bodies. Meh, she only spent double her budget. That's not bad at all.

The Governor General is kept as a symbolic gesture. For example, as the meanings states: Symbolic: 2: serving as a visible symbol for something abstract; "a crown is emblematic of royalty" Clarkson is just representative of an unecessary historic purpose. The way you are talking seems to suggest you'd rather the Queen sign in our laws again. Wonderful.

Yes, but anti-Bushism is spilling over into anti-American sentiment. This is a fact internationally and as far as I can see from the people I associate with, it is with them too.

Yes, I meant the fundamentalists. I think that everyone has muslim friends. But, New World vs. the Middle East is a big thing right now and I can only see it gettnig worse as the need for oil increases.

Personally, I don't think that this will be a big problem for Ontarians. We have went through so much other crap over the past 10 years that something like this is childs play. I don't think that it is possible for the Federal Liberals to lose more votes in the province than they already have. They about all the crap that went down preceeding the last election. Everyone was predicting that the Conservatives were going to actually pull it off. And that is when big things such as McGuinty's health care premiums and the sponsorship scandal. Truth be told, Ontario was in a lot worse with that then the 5 billion dollars D.M. wants back. Twenty-three billion dollars is a lot to pay out but I think that Ontarians are used to it and care for the have-nots. So, if we get it back, right on. If we don't, who cares.